commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Prepare commons RDF to JDK 9
Date Fri, 09 Mar 2018 00:34:20 GMT
That seems like a good pragmatic way about it.

Gary

On Thu, Mar 8, 2018, 16:08 Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 15:09:18 -0700, Ralph Goers wrote:
> >> On Mar 8, 2018, at 11:06 AM, Gilles <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 11:01:08 -0700, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Gilles
> >>> <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 10:48:28 -0700, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Gilles
> >>>>> <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 10:09:22 -0700, Gary Gregory wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 10:01 AM, ajs6f <ajs6f@apache.org>
wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> > On Mar 8, 2018, at 8:33 AM, Gilles
> >>>>>>> <gilles@harfang.homelinux.org>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> given component and see if we want to only depend on java.base
> >>>>>>> or create
> >>>>>>> Maven modules to compartmentalize dependencies.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Then these modules can define "module-info" files, and an actual
> >>>>>> build will prove that the dependencies are as expected.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> As Ralph as pointed out, you cannot generate a module-info file
> >>>>> without
> >>>>> also using an MR Jar unless you also want to make Java 9 your
> >>>>> base line.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Did you see, a few lines above: "[...] assuming JDK 9+ [...]"? ;-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Related note: Java 9 is the target for compiling
> >>>> "commons-rng-examples" (maven module)
> >>>> in "Commons RNG" because one of the examples is composed of
> >>>> JPMS modules (with "module-info" files) that depend on the
> >>>> "official" artefacts (targeting Java 6) that declare an
> >>>> "automatic module name" in the manifest.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Right now
> >>>
> >>>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=commons-rdf.git;a=blob;f=pom.xml;h=06cc58c19b79af5cdf2f3d29d9a743c8adb2b548;hb=HEAD
> >>> shows Java 8 as the target.
> >>>
> >>> Are you taking about changing that to Java 9?
> >>>
> >>> I'll that choice to the Common RDF community but it seems that this
> >>> would
> >>> exclude a lot of users.
> >>
> >> As for "Commons RNG", the purpose may just be to prove (by
> >> usage) that the maven modules are also JPMS modules.
> >
> >
> > I am so confused. I am not sure what the goal is.  Let me put it this
> > way. Log4j 2 2.x supports Java 7+. We added support for Java 9 by
> > introducing a multi-release jar.  Android developers can not use any
> > version of Log4j since we did that. What I am saying is that if you
> > turn any jar into a multi-release jar it will no longer be usable in
> > Android and there is no way around it until Android Studio is fixed.
> > The problem is that the android tool inspects every class file in the
> > jar even if it is located under META-INF and it dies if it sees a
> > Java
> > 9 class.
> >
> > Ralph
>
> I've asked on this list about leveraging the new features of
> JDK 9 in the upcoming release of [RNG].  When it came to
> multi-release JAR, I trusted Gary's expedite answer ("Don't
> do it") based, as yours, on experience.  So, no issue.
>
> Yet I also wanted to ensure that the maven modules were
> JPMS-compliant: Would the declared "Automatic-Module-Name"
> behave as expected on JDK 9?
> No answer for that one.  So I resorted to create a "dummy"
> application (see "commons-rng-examples/examples-jpms").
> I guess the same could be done for [RDF] unless there is a
> smarter way. ;-)
>
> Gilles
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message