commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: [LANG] Add module-info.java?
Date Sun, 15 Oct 2017 19:20:57 GMT
I should point out - just for reference - that Log4j has a maven module dedicated to Java 9
and only that is built with the Java 9 compiler. Everything else uses Java 7. We also use
Java 7 when running the maven site plugin. It complains when it finds Java 9 classes but it
doesn’t fail.

I don’t think waiting is a very good option. At the very least commons lang should add the
Automatic-Module-Name header. This can be done with any compiler version. But adding a module-info.java
file is pretty straightforward - especially since it is likely that everything will be exported.

Ralph

> On Oct 15, 2017, at 3:04 AM, Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne@joda.org> wrote:
> 
> Log4J is adding module-info.java now, and its not overly complicated
> to do here either. The main question seems to be around the maven site
> plugin, but thats likely to be fixed soon. ie. I'd like to get to the
> point where all the basic commons projects have module-info.java
> (because proper modularization is going to occur bottom up, so the
> earlier we can get these out the better).
> 
> FWIW, its up to Android to sort out its tooling - Java 9 is not going away!
> 
> I'd like to establish if there are any fundamental objections to the
> concept of building only on Java 9. I'm also willing to try and find a
> way to get the build to still work on Java 7, but that releases have
> to be on Java 9.
> 
> Stephen
> 
> 
> 
> On 15 October 2017 at 10:49, Benedikt Ritter <britter@apache.org> wrote:
>> Okay, let’s get back to topic. I feel that the community want’s to wait some
more until at least all maven plugins we use work with Java 9?
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Benedikt
>> 
>>> Am 15.10.2017 um 01:30 schrieb Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>:
>>> 
>>> Which is mainly because the version of Java in Android is intentionally
>>> lacking about half of the standard library. Perhaps this will improve in
>>> the future now that they're adopting OpenJDK, though.
>>> 
>>> On 14 October 2017 at 17:04, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I need to point out that even after removing that there would be a lot of
>>>> stuff in log4j-core that doesn’t work in Android.
>>>> 
>>>> Ralph
>>>> 
>>>>> On Oct 14, 2017, at 12:02 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I am wondering if this is a little too early. A lot of tooling our there
>>>>> does not play well with Java 9 class files.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The last time I tried to use Log4j 2 (which contains Java 9 classes files
>>>>> in the right multi-jar spot) with an Android app, the Android tooling
>>>> threw
>>>>> up all over itself because it was incorrectly trying to do something
with
>>>>> these Java 9 class file :-(
>>>>> 
>>>>> Gary
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Stephen Colebourne <
>>>> scolebourne@joda.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 14 October 2017 at 14:05, Rob Tompkins <chtompki@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Oct 14, 2017, at 8:43 AM, Benedikt Ritter <britter@apache.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Feels like a change that would warrant a major version change,
but that
>>>>>> would have us maintaining another major version branch.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> No need for a major version change. Its just one more .class file
in
>>>>>> the jar file. The jar file is still usable on Java 7 and 8, its just
>>>>>> that the *build* is Java 9 specific.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> As Pascal says, really we want all the maven plugins to be ready
for
>>>>>> this, but we don't control those timescales.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Options to fix the site plugin problem:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1) Alter the PR so that releases have to be in two stages - jar file
>>>>>> build/deploy on Java 9 and site on Java 8. The risk is that someone
>>>>>> forgets to do the release using Java 9.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 2) Compile the module-info.java file on Java 9 and check it in (as
a
>>>>>> binary module-info.class file). Then the build could stay on Java
7/8.
>>>>>> The problem however is that whenever a new package is added, the
>>>>>> module-info.class file would have to be recreated and re-checked
in,
>>>>>> an error-prone process.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Stephen
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com>
>> 
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> 
> 



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message