Christian, Those references are amazing and prove my point about the need to improve the process to prevent imposters and other types of name collisions.
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:35 AM Christian Stein <sormu...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 6:37 AM Manfred Moser <manf...@simpligility.com> > wrote: > > > From the very start of the work on the module system and throughout the > > work people from the Maven project have been involved. > > > > There was never a willingness to create any sort of enforcement.. only a > > request to the community to do the right thing > > > > From my point of view the Maven project can not do anything really. > > > > > Except for doing some related sanity checks, like [0]. (-: > As of today, there are already 13263 artifacts at Maven Central with > invalid module names, due to not checking the "Automatic-Module-Name" > manifest attribute. > More details at [1], the daily-updated index of "unique" Java modules > published to Maven Central. > > Perhaps "we" should guide users to adhere to name their Maven artifacts > like the Java module it contains. And start the artifact name with the > Group ID... > More details about this naming convention proposal at [2]. > > Cheers, > Christian > > [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MSHARED-773 > [1] https://github.com/sormuras/modules#suspicious-modules > [2] > > https://sormuras.github.io/blog/2019-08-04-maven-coordinates-and-java-module-names.html >
