Hi Everyone, While working on the Micronaut change, I discovered that i18n configuration is basically required for both the Domain & Controller projects, but loosely being enforced:
1. `grails-controllers` has a runtimeOnly dependency in its build.gradle on i18n 2. DomainClassGrailsPlugin from `grails-domain-class` has a dependsOn of i18n 3. ControllersGrailsPlugin from `grails-controllers` has a dependsOn of i18n The i18n project only has 2 purposes: 1. to define the location of the message properties 2. to support reloading them. Given that the grails-i18n project has limited scope & dependencies, I'd like to propose the following: 1. We make grails-i18n an API dependency of grails-domain-class. - By doing so grails-controllers & grails-domain-class both will always have the i18n plugin applied. 2. We consider the i18n plugin package private and change its group coordinate to `org.apache.grails.i18n`. This means we will no longer require end user apps to include it & it will be included via our other 'org.apache.grails' dependencies. I'm proposing this because both controllers & domains technically require i18n to be defined, but we're only having it defined as a side effect of users including it in their dependencies. Having end users define it is exposing an implementation detail of Grails, which goes against our goal of simplicity / convention over configuration. As to why this is so important: We have gradually moved towards using AutoConfiguration in Grails 7. Our end goal is to have all of the grails-core configuration defined via AutoConfiguration or Configuration classes. Scott has done a lot of the initial work, but there's more work that may have to be done to get scaffolding working with the micronaut loading approach. Having transitive dependencies like this prevents us from adding these dependencies as we move to AutoConfiguration. -James
