[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6945?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16306357#comment-16306357
]
Bryan Pendleton commented on DERBY-6945:
----------------------------------------
Hi Rick,
If you were to step back, at this point in the process,
how would you assess where we are, what we've done
so far, and what lies ahead?
>From my perspective, you've done some very successful
refactoring, and I really appreciate and am grateful for the
effort to clean up the complexity that we once introduced
in order to enable the 'derbyshared' classes, but I'm still
not sure if we know enough about the Java 9 Module
system to be able to clearly describe the final goal.
My own expectation is that we will work our way around to
packaging Derby as a single jar file, and that will be just
fine, and simpler in many ways, as I think that Java platforms
have evolved a LOT in 20 years, and the needs that drove
us to have half-a-dozen separate configurations and packages
are no longer as interesting now as they once were.
But I'd love to hear your feeling about what lies ahead, and
what sort of result you see emerging.
thanks,
bryan
> Re-package Derby as a collection of jigsaw modules
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-6945
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-6945
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 10.13.1.2
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
> Attachments: derby-6945-01-aa-remove_derbyPreBuild_dep.diff,
> derby-6945-02-ab-newDerbySharedJar.diff,
> derby-6945-02-ac-newDerbySharedJar.diff, derby-6945-03-aa-partitionTest.diff,
> derby-6945-04-aa-moveRunClass.diff,
> derby-6945-05-aa-removeRedundant_Attribute_SQLState.diff,
> derby-6945-06-aa-removeOtherSharedDuplicates.diff,
> derby-6945-07-aa-net_client_overlap.diff,
> derby-6945-08-aa-move_shared_iapi_under_shared.diff,
> derby-6945-08-ab-move_shared_iapi_under_shared.diff, jdeps.out.tar
>
>
> Once we commit to building with Java 9 (see DERBY-6856), we should consider
> re-packaging Derby as a set of jigsaw modules. This would result in a
> different set of release artifacts. This might be a good opportunity to
> address the Tomcat artifactory issues raised by issue DERBY-6944.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
