My 2 cents. I’ve spent many, many hours trying to make Log4j 2 JPMS compatible. It is still nowhere near done. While JPMS sounds simple the side effects it has permeate everything. If you were to look at the Log4j 2 master branch right now it is a complete mess. Adding Java 9 support was bad enough because the JDK removed classes and replaced them with others making it very difficult to have a single source code base that worked in all supported Java versions. But JPMS probably tripled the complexity because it was no longer simple to build test jars and unit tests in the same Maven module.
Although I do plan to finish the work and clean it up, I seriously doubt the work will have been worth the effort. To date the requests for full JPMS support have been non-existent. I’ve had more requests to support GraalVM than JPMS. Ralph > On Nov 5, 2021, at 2:01 AM, Christian Stein <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 7:55 AM Olivier Cailloux <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> ... >> Armed with this rich information, Maven could auto-generate the module- >> info.java file before compiling the code; auto-generate the alternative >> module-info.java file before compiling and running the tests; >> > ... > > > That's like saying: Hey Maven, generate my packages (and classes, and > interfaces, and...)! ;-) > > Or as Robert expressed it: https://stackoverflow.com/a/43213506/1431016 > Also read his article linked in the answer. > > Cheers, > Christian --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
