Cedric, you can not have a dash in the name if you want the module name be referenced in a module-info.java.
so it should be org.apache.groovy.json cheers, Rémi On December 3, 2017 10:31:27 AM GMT+01:00, "Cédric Champeau" <cedric.champ...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi fellow Groovy devs, > >We had 2 different conversations in the past weeks regarding automatic >module names for Groovy. We also starting receiving notifications that >some >3rd party projects are blocked by Groovy when upgrading to modules >(which >is no surprise). Logback for one. > >We need to move forward, and take small steps forward. So, here's the >plan: > >1a. Replace the groovy-all jar with a groovy-all POM with just >dependencies, so that those depending on groovy-all.jar would now get >groovy.jar, groovy-json.jar and friends, instead of the all jar. >1b. Add automatic module names for all jars we have. Since we know >breaking >changes are coming, I'd suggest using "org.codehaus.groovy", >"org.codehaus.groovy-json", ... >2. Fix split packages >3. When this is fixed, change module names to "org.apache.groovy", >"org.apache.groovy-json", ... > >I would do 1a and 1b as soon as possible (2.5). >I would do 2 and 3 for 3.0, since those are binary breaking changes. >This >is also why I would leverage that to move to org.apache module names. > >I am against providing another -all jar, which would be confusing. Also >we >have to get rid, as a larger community (java), of the bad habit of >using >fat jars as dependencies. Those should only be used in final >applications, >not libraries, so should be transparent to consumers. > >Please vote, so that we can move forward. > >[ ] +1 The plan sounds good >[ ] 0 I don't understand enough of the context to have an opinion >[ ] -1 because... > >Thanks a lot, -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
