right, it has to be a valid java identifier.
Am 03.12.2017 um 11:39 schrieb Remi Forax:
Cedric,
you can not have a dash in the name if you want the module name be
referenced in a module-info.java <http://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.
