cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andriy Redko <>
Subject Re: New Java 9 master
Date Tue, 02 Jan 2018 13:54:10 GMT
I might be mistaken (sorry, haven't worked with Jigsaw closely yet), but I think the service
loader would work the same 
way in case of named module and automaticaly named module. The only differences would be contraints/rules/visibility:
named module just implicitly open/export/import everything while named module should be picky
and precise. 

RMB> Or the worst since you dont expose the "api" but all the classes and breaks SPI since
service loader loading is different in named modules, no?

RMB> Le 31 déc. 2017 19:15, "Andriy Redko" <> a écrit :

RMB> I am not sure about plugin part, to be honest. I would better craft the
by hand (but use
RMB>  the tooling, jdeps f.e., to get the initial list of modules) and have it in the source
tree for each module,
RMB>  so to keep the history, etc. That would be aligned with Sergey's suggestion to have
Java 9 master sometime
RMB>  in the future.

RMB>  But, by and large, you may be right and the plugin is the viable option. Still, if
99% of the CXF dependencies are
RMB>  going to be automatic modules nonetheless, what it will buy us? And looking into
other projects, that seems to
RMB>  be the starting point for many. Anyway, I would prefer to get it all and right now
:-D but realistically, I see
RMB>  the automatic module name to be the less riskier approach to begin with (just a manifest
change), not necessarily
RMB>  the best one though.

RMB>  Best Regards,
RMB>      Andriy Redko

 RMB>> Hmm, shout if I didn't get your comments properly and my comment is obvious but
I think 1 and 3 are fine - that's
 RMB>> why I proposed them - because you can create the with java 8.
This is what does the plugin I
 RMB>> mentionned, writing it directly with java 9 (long story short it has a module-info
parser and writer).

 RMB>> Romain Manni-Bucau
 RMB>> @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn

 RMB>> 2017-12-31 16:58 GMT+01:00 Andriy Redko <>:

 RMB>> Hi Romain,

 RMB>>  I think there are 2 parts regarding modules: 1) using CXF from modularized
 RMB>>  applications and 2) release/redesign CXF in a modular fashion (I mean Java 9
 RMB>>  The 2nd part is where we are heading eventually but we won't be trully modular
 RMB>>  all our dependencies are available as modules as well. The idea of adding
 RMB>>  automatic module name is helping out with the 1st part. Regarding your questions
 RMB>>  though:

 RMB>>  1. Adding would mean, at least, to branch the artifacts (java9+
/ java8).
 RMB>>  2. Yes, I think it makes sense, this is the recommended way, but we should better
make a
 RMB>>  proposal first (as part of the JIRA Dennis created).
 RMB>>  3. I think this is the only way (as won't compile with Java

 RMB>>  Automatic modules is a good start (arguably, for sure), because from the efforts
 RMB>>  perspetive, it looks doable in a short time vs adding proper
 RMB>>  each module, which would take significantly more. Thoughts?

 RMB>>  Best Regards,
 RMB>>      Andriy Redko

  RMB>>> Hi guys,

  RMB>>> Few random notes/questions:

  RMB>>> 1. Why not using
  RMB>>> and assume the moduleinfo instead of working it around with automatic
  RMB>>> module name?
  RMB>>> 2. For the naming it should really be someting like $group.$module IMO,
  RMB>>> probably with underscores instead of iphens for the module and maybe
  RMB>>> removing cxf from the module dince it is in the package
  RMB>>> 3. Is it possible to double relezse each module, one with the module info
  RMB>>> (if you do 1, or without the automatic module name if you dont) and a
  RMB>>> qualifier jdk9 and keep current ones as today until the whole stack is java
  RMB>>> 9 (transitively). Easy to break consumers otherwise.

  RMB>>> Le 31 déc. 2017 13:38, "Dennis Kieselhorst" <> a écrit

  >>>> > Exactly, that's the idea, updating the manifest with
  >>>> Automatic-Module-Name. We could also add a sample
  >>>> > project (this would be Java 9 based) to illustrate the basic usage
  >>>> CXF from/within green field Java 9
  >>>> > modular project (although we may need to do more work here I suspect).
  >>>> Thanks.
  >>>> I've opened CXF-7600 for it. What should be the Automatic-Module-Name
  >>>> for cxf-core? Just org.apache.cxf? Or org.apache.cxf.core which doesn't
  >>>> match the package name structure?

  >>>> Regards
  >>>> Dennis

View raw message