maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Robert Scholte" <rfscho...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Folder structure for Java 9 project?
Date Wed, 02 May 2018 09:44:51 GMT
Hi Martin,

It is also a matter of numbers: I believe the current way of work of JPMS  
with Maven is good enough and if there are issues, most of them should be  
fixable. For me there's no reason to work on a proposal which is unlikely  
to be implemented, since there are much more other issues which add more  
value for the community.

If you want to work on a proposal, you should change your starting point  
to get the best chance of success.
What you want is a new packaging-type with matching lifecycle. Lets call  
it jpms-app, since the end-result is one application based on JPMS, it is  
not a library. (and this also means that none of the sub-modules can be  
shared, unless you write your own install/deploy plugins that can handle  
this)
Next you should be able to apply new defaults to the pom and plugin  
configuration. This in not possible in Maven (yet). Or write your own  
plugins and bind them to the phases.

It will be a long, long road, I just have to give you this huge warning.
Also keep in mind: how well does it work with IDEs and how easy it for  
contributors?
Are these tiny jpms-features really worth implementing?

thanks,
Robert

On Wed, 02 May 2018 10:58:41 +0200, Martin Desruisseaux  
<martin.desruisseaux@geomatys.com> wrote:

> Hello Robert
>
> Le 30/04/2018 à 21:00, Robert Scholte a écrit :
>
>> All seems to fall back to an issue with the maven-javadoc-plugin. What
>> if we try to fix that first?
>>
> That would help a lot. Getting Maven javadoc:aggregate goal to work
> would address maybe 95% of the needs. But Javadoc is not the only Java
> tools working on many Jigsaw modules at once. For example I don't know
> today how to run annotation processors (with javac) on many modules at
> once with Maven layout. Admittedly few peoples may want to do that, but
> those who want may find it difficult currently. If we wanted that
> functionality with Maven, we may need a kind of "javac:aggregate" goal.
> There is also other Java tools working on many modules at once are
> (jlink, …), but I do not yet know the implications for them.
>
> Even for Javadoc, being able to use a Jigsaw layout may open interesting
> possibilities. It would allow to create separated multi-modules javadoc
> for different parts of a project. For example a multi-modules javadoc
> for the core, and another multi-modules javadoc for the examples. An
> example of such separation is proposed at [1] (proposal only - not yet
> applied).
>
> I was thinking if it could be another packaging mode, similar to
> <packaging>war</packaging>? Implications:
>
>   * For maven-javac-plugin and maven-javadoc-plugin, the main
>     implications would be:
>       o to replace the --source-path option by --module-source-path;
>       o unconditionally (i.e. no need to scan for module-info.java)
>         replace the -classpath option by --module-path when depending on
>         another Maven artifact using this packaging;
>       o no need anymore to fix Maven javadoc:aggregate goal.
>   * The maven-jar-plugin could execute jar on each Jigsaw module; I have
>     verified that java --module-path /<directory>/ works if
>     /<directory>/ contains JAR files of Jigsaw modules, so other Maven
>     plugins using Java tools can still handle the output as if it was a
>     single Maven artifact, with a single --module-path option.
>
> What about drafting a proposal on a Wiki page (or any other support)?
>
>     Martin
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/opengeospatial/geoapi/issues/30

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


Mime
View raw message