rmannibucau commented on a change in pull request #92:
URL: https://github.com/apache/openjpa/pull/92#discussion_r771423122
##########
File path: openjpa-all/pom.xml
##########
@@ -110,6 +110,7 @@
<Specification-Title>JSR-338 Java
Persistence</Specification-Title>
<Specification-Vendor>ORACLE,
Inc.</Specification-Vendor>
<Specification-Version>2.2</Specification-Version>
+
<Automatic-Module-Name>org.apache.openjpa.all</Automatic-Module-Name>
Review comment:
> I believe every module need it's own unique name :))
Right but when you do an all on one you dont create a new module but you
merge N modules.
Issue is on consumer side, you depend on org.apache.openjpa.kernel, with
this strategy your module-info will depend on openjpa.all or openjpa.kernel (ie
the deployment is bound to the build now) which is quite unlikely so it is
better to have stable names for the same packages.
This is why I think we should choose to enable JPMS for only the fatjar or
only independent modules but not both.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openjpa.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
