Michael, is it ok for you now?
Regards, Hervé Le dimanche 28 mai 2017, 11:16:58 CEST Arnaud Héritier a écrit : > Let's go for option 2 > > Le dim. 28 mai 2017 à 12:44, Robert Scholte <[email protected]> a écrit : > > On behalf of the expert group I can confirm we agreed on this solution. > > I don't see any reason why this would change as this topic is marked as > > resolved. > > And I think it is a good sign, for some reason there is/was this rumor > > that Maven doesn't run on J9. > > > > I second option 2. > > > > thanks, > > Robert > > > > On Sun, 28 May 2017 11:15:00 +0200, Michael Osipov <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > Am 2017-05-28 um 09:43 schrieb Hervé BOUTEMY: > > >> are there seconders for > > >> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven-resolver/commit/17f804d7 > > >> (aka "option 2")? > > > > > > I'd completely leave it off to 1.x until the expect group with Mark > > > Reinhold has agreed on the disputed points. > > > > > > I don't see a reason to put any effort into a system which is still in > > > constant flux. > > > > > >> Le samedi 27 mai 2017, 19:05:27 CEST Hervé BOUTEMY a écrit : > > >>> good links > > >>> yes, with this in mind, "api" is required for artifactId but should > > >>> not be > > >>> added to module name: good catch, and good experience to share because > > >>> that > > >>> was not so obvious > > >>> > > >>> Regards, > > >>> > > >>> Hervé > > >>> > > >>> Le samedi 27 mai 2017, 18:43:22 CEST Robert Scholte a écrit : > > >>>> There's no experience with this yet. > > >>>> > > >>>> Stephen Colebourne has written to related blogs: module naming[1] and > > >>>> modules are not artifacts[2] > > >>>> which might suggest that "api" should not be added. > > >>>> I do understand the addition of "api". And to make it worse, this is > > >>>> probably the most important artifact needing a module name. In most > > >>>> cases > > >>>> developers will only need this one: frameworks will handle the > > >>>> implementation part. :) > > >>>> > > >>>> Robert > > >>>> > > >>>> [1] http://blog.joda.org/2017/04/java-se-9-jpms-module-naming.html > > >>>> [2] > > > > http://blog.joda.org/2017/04/java-se-9-jpms-modules-are-not-artifacts.html > > > > >>>> On Sat, 27 May 2017 17:48:24 +0200, Hervé BOUTEMY > > >>>> <[email protected]> > > >>>> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>>> second option committed in another branch: > > > > >>>>> option 1: > > http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven-resolver/commit/d1724eb7 > > > > >>>>> option 2: > > http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven-resolver/commit/17f804d7 > > > > >>>>> The only part that I'm not sure in option 2 is > > >>>>> org.apache.maven.resolver.api > > > >>>>> org.apache.maven.resolver: is it better to be explicit on the api or > > >>>>> implicit? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Regards, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Hervé > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Le samedi 27 mai 2017 17:37:03 CEST, vous avez écrit : > > >>>>>> I think I would change the following 2: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> org.apache.maven.resolver.connector_basic > > > >>>>>> org.apache.maven.resolver.connector.basic (in line with transport) > > >>>>>> org.apache.maven.resolver.test_util > > > >>>>>> org.apache.maven.resolver.testutil > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> it's a matter of taste: the underscores look kind of weird, but > > >>>>>> that's > > >>>>>> probably caused because we've never used them as package names. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> And wondering if "api" should be changed, since this is the > > >>>>>> access-module > > >>>>>> and we don't use api in our packages: > > >>>>>> org.apache.maven.resolver.api > org.apache.maven.resolver > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Using a property makes it easier to configure the maven-jar-plugin, > > >>>>>> but > > >>>>>> it > > >>>>>> also makes these constants turn into variables, i.e. you could set > > >>>>>> them > > >>>>>> via system properties or cmdline args. > > >>>>>> If only we supported something like > > > > <Automatic-Module-Name>${project.properties["AutomaticModuleName"]}</Au > > > > >>>>>> to > > >>>>>> mat ic-Module-Name> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> for the rest it's looking good. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> thanks > > >>>>>> Robert > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On Sat, 27 May 2017 17:20:15 +0200, Hervé BOUTEMY > > >>>>>> <[email protected]> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> please review and second if you think it's ok: > > http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/maven-resolver/commit/d1724eb7 > > > > >>>>>>> Regards, > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Hervé > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Le samedi 27 mai 2017, 13:24:47 CEST Hervé BOUTEMY a écrit : > > >>>>>>>> he he, Java 9 is really coming, with associated real world > > >>>>>>>> questions. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Maven Artifact Resolver is one of rare Maven components that has > > >>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>> chance to > > >>>>>>>> become a collection Java 9 modules, since it was written quite > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> recently > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> and > > >>>>>>>> is pure new code as a result of Maven 3 refactoring, then does > > >>>>>>>> not > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> have > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> shared package names issues we have with Maven core itself. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> And since it is expected to be a lib for easy embedding of > > >>>>>>>> artifact > > >>>>>>>> resolution, making it a collection of Java 9 modules would be not > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> only a > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> great opportunity to test Java 9 modules, but it could be useful > > >>>>>>>> for > > >>>>>>>> people > > >>>>>>>> using it. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Then I'm highly in favor of trying. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Adding Automatic-Module-Name to the MANIFEST.MF looks feasible > > >>>>>>>> right > > >>>>>>>> now, > > >>>>>>>> without waiting much: I'm pretty sure module names will be > > >>>>>>>> obvious, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> and > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> much > > >>>>>>>> better if we define them instead of waiting for automatic names. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Let's > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> start! MRESOLVER-26 created [1] > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Then there is the question of making real modules: is it feasible > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> right > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> now? > > >>>>>>>> Or would we need a delay to tweak the module descriptors? And > > >>>>>>>> that > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> would > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> mean that we need Java 9 to build, even if the generated bytecode > > >>>>>>>> remains > > >>>>>>>> Java 7 compatible, isn't it? Is Maven tooling ready to it? > > >>>>>>>> MRESOLVER-27 created to track the issue [2], but I'm not sure > > >>>>>>>> this > > >>>>>>>> is > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>> right time to do this job, but for the next release after this > > >>>>>>>> 1.1.0 > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Regards, > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Hervé > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-26 > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRESOLVER-27 > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Le samedi 27 mai 2017, 11:58:43 CEST Robert Scholte a écrit : > > >>>>>>>>> Hi, > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> I've got a question from Remi Forax if we could add Java9 module > > >>>>>>>>> descriptors to this project. > > >>>>>>>>> This will be one of the first which can provide such descriptors > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> since it > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> has no required dependencies other then its own and its package > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> structure > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> seems valid with the new Java9 rules. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> We haven't discussed this in general yet, but we have several > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> projects > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> which are at the bottom of the dependency tree which should > > >>>>>>>>> provide > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> either > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> a module name or module descriptor when possible. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Do we want to help the community by having already several > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> libraries > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> with > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> a module descriptor? > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Or we could add a Automatic-Module-Name to the MANIFEST.MF, so > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> others > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> can > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> refer to it by its official module name and we can add the > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> descriptor > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> once > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Java9 has officially been released. (pro: doesn't require Java 9 > > >>>>>> : > > >>>>>> :) ) > > >>>>>> : > > >>>>>>>>> Or do nothing yet... > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> thanks, > > >>>>>>>>> Robert > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 27 May 2017 11:42:32 +0200, Hervé BOUTEMY > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> Hi, > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> No objection from me, thanks for keeping the ball rolling. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> I tried to improve documentation by adding some useful links to > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> other > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> related > > >>>>>>>>>> components [1]: I think the current state is better and ok for > > >>>>>>>>>> a > > >>>>>>>>>> release. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> One key question now is about Aether wiki content [2]: should > > >>>>>>>>>> we > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> copy > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> it? In a > > >>>>>>>>>> wiki or in components sources? > > >>>>>>>>>> I suppose wiki source format is supported by Doxia, then it > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> could be > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> imported > > >>>>>>>>>> quite easily in sources. > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> And of course, there is the final question: should we do it > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> before > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> the > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> release? > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Regards, > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Hervé > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> [1] http://maven.apache.org/resolver-archives/resolver-LATEST/ > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> [2] http://wiki.eclipse.org/Aether > > >>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> Le vendredi 26 mai 2017, 16:18:02 CEST Michael Osipov a écrit : > > >>>>>>>>>>> Hi folks, > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> is there anything holding us back from MRESOLVER 1.1.0? > > >>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to start the release by the end of the week and have > > >>>>>>>>>>> it > > >>>>>>>>>>> integrated into Maven 3.5.1. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Any objections? > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Michael > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >>>>>>>> - > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >>>>>>>> - > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >>>>>>>> - > > >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>>> - > > >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>>> > > >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>> > > >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > >> > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > -- > > ----- > Arnaud Héritier > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
