Sounds like you could use --add-modules to add the module separately from the command line, or add the module to the application's module-info rather than the libraries.
In general, I suspect a library module-info.java should depend only on the other modules it really needs (eg. the API of slf4j), while something else, such as the application, adds the implementation module (eg. the SLF4J implementation). Stephen On 23 April 2017 at 18:14, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > Yes, I know it doesn't replace Maven, but in this case I have a dependency > that is not required to compile but is required to run. It appears I have to > convert my runtime scopes to compile in order to get the module to compile > and build properly. > > That sucks. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Apr 23, 2017, at 7:43 AM, Stephen Colebourne <scolebou...@joda.org> wrote: >> >> I've never used that myself, but don't see anything similar. >> Remember though that JPMS isn't trying to replace Maven. It just >> intends there to be a reliable set of modules when running in the >> platform. >> Stephen >> >> >>> On 23 April 2017 at 08:57, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >>> How does the module system support Maven’s runtime scope? >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>>> On Apr 21, 2017, at 10:48 PM, Stephen Colebourne <scolebou...@joda.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> See http://blog.joda.org/2017/04/java-9-modules-jpms-basics.html and >>>> https://www.slideshare.net/scolebourne/java-se-9-modules-jpms-an-introduction >>>> >>>> Basically, you need "requires static" for optional dependencies. The >>>> exception if for a module where the dependency is an annotation where >>>> you don't need the annotation to be present at runtime. eg. @NonNull >>>> from FindBugs >>>> >>>> Depending on things that haven't been modularized yet is risky. It is >>>> allowed however, and its known as "automatic modules". Basically, it >>>> looks exactly like a normal "requires" clause, its just that you are >>>> _guessing_ what the module name of the dependency will be! >>>> >>>> This is why I started this thread. By saying _now_what the module name >>>> will be, you greatly reduce the chance of people guessing wrongly. >>>> Getting everyone to usesuper-package reverse DNS naming helps too. >>>> >>>> Stephen >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 22 April 2017 at 02:11, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >>>>> On to the next question - which I apologize for asking as it may not >>>>> apply to Commons. Log4j has lots of optional components to support lots >>>>> of third party stuff (some ASF projects and some not). How do we handle >>>>> things that haven’t yet been modularized? Normally I would expect to have >>>>> requires directives. >>>>> >>>>> Ralph >>>>> >>>>>> On Apr 21, 2017, at 6:04 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for taking a look Stephen. I appreciate the guidance. I will be >>>>>> sure to submit a PR when I get something going with Log4j 2. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ralph >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 21, 2017, at 3:01 PM, Stephen Colebourne <scolebou...@joda.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Some rules: >>>>>>> - Each module contains a set of packages, each of which must be >>>>>>> specified explicitly. >>>>>>> - Modules depend on other modules, but must not form a cycle of >>>>>>> dependencies. >>>>>>> - No package can be in two modules >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Looking at the Javadoc here - >>>>>>> https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/javadoc.html - it seems like each >>>>>>> jar file has a separate set of packages it contains, with an obvious >>>>>>> super-package for each jar file*. Furthermore, the super-packages of >>>>>>> the jar files do not clash, so I think you are fine in naming terms. >>>>>>> What I can't be sure from the Javadoc is whether there is a cycle of >>>>>>> dependencies. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Possible modules: >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j.core >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j.io >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j.taglib >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j.jcl >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j.jul >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j.flume.appender >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j.jmx.gui >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j.web >>>>>>> - org.apache.logging.log4j.nosql.appender >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * the slf4j bridge is problematic, but is being addressed by changes in >>>>>>> slf4j. >>>>>>> * the logf4 v1 bridge probably can't be modularized >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bernd has addressed the point about the need to export all packages >>>>>>> individually, allowing the modules above. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Stephen >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 21 April 2017 at 21:34, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> I am having a hard time figuring out how Log4j is going to be able to >>>>>>>> support this. The API itself is in org.apache.logging.log4j and some >>>>>>>> packages under that. All the main implementation is under >>>>>>>> org.apache.logging.log4j.core. These obviously overlap. Most of our >>>>>>>> other jars have packages that are in org.apache.logging.log4j.xxx >>>>>>>> where xxx matches the jar name. We aren’t going to change the API to >>>>>>>> support modules. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Is there some reasonable way around this? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ralph >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Apr 21, 2017, at 6:16 AM, Stephen Colebourne >>>>>>>>> <scolebou...@joda.org> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 21 April 2017 at 13:59, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> What happens when there is a API break which necessitates a package >>>>>>>>>> name change? >>>>>>>>>> I assume that the module name will also need to change to the new >>>>>>>>>> super-package. >>>>>>>>>> e.g. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Commons-Lang4 >>>>>>>>>> -> super-package org.apache.commons.lang4 >>>>>>>>>> -> module org.apache.commons.lang4 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, thats right. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> AFAICT Commons generally has obvious and unique super-packages for >>>>>>>>>> each component. >>>>>>>>>> This should make it easier than for larger projects with lots of jars >>>>>>>>>> and potentially overlapping package names. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> However even Commons has some code that uses a different package >>>>>>>>>> structure. >>>>>>>>>> e.g. NET uses examples as the super-package. >>>>>>>>>> This includes working examples that are included in the release. >>>>>>>>>> I guess that will have to change (which is probably a good idea >>>>>>>>>> anyway). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Yes, as it stands, [net] would be a bad modular citizen, because it >>>>>>>>> exposes the "examples" package, and thus prevents any other module >>>>>>>>> from using that package. Just move it to >>>>>>>>> org.apache.commons.net.examples. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Stephen >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
