Hi Aaron thank you very much for your mail. Both, opening jira, as well as providing patches are very welcome, as well ad any other feedback!
Best Anatole Am 05.03.2018 15:53 schrieb "Aaron Coburn" <[email protected]>: > Hi, > > I am a bit new to Tamaya, so apologies if this has already been discussed. > It is clear that the codebase targets Java 8. It is also entirely _usable_ > on newer (jdk9 & jdk10) platforms. However, it is not currently possible to > build Tamaya on jdk9 or jdk10. My first question is: should it be possible > to build Tamaya on the latest JDK? > > In fact, the only impediment to building on jdk9 is the > karaf-maven-plugin. In particular, some Java EE libraries are no longer on > the classpath by default: javax.xml.bind and javax.activation. With jdk10, > these libraries will no longer be included in the Java SE at all. Adding > those dependencies directly to the plugin configuration or upgrading to the > latest (milestone) Karaf release makes it possible to build on jdk9. > > Building on jdk10 has the additional problem of the javadoc plugin not > being able to parse the JVM version string with commons-lang 3.5 release. > Forcing the use of commons-lang 3.7 for the plugin solves that. > > Is this something you all would like to support? I can provide a pull > request for that. > > > The other, related, issue has to do with the Java 9 module system > (JSR-376). Even while targeting JDK 1.8 for the Tamaya codebase, there is a > fairly simple thing that can be done to make the Tamaya codebase easier to > use with the Java 9 module system. Basically, it involves adding a > "Automatic-Module-Name: <module-name>" entry in the MANIFEST.MF file. > Practically, this means adjusting the various bnd.bnd files in the > codebase. For instance, the tamaya-core JAR would likely have a module name > of: org.apache.tamaya.core (typically, this would align with the existing > OSGi Export-Package). The tamaya-api JAR currently exports two packages > (o.a.t and o.a.t.spi), so perhaps the module name would simply be > org.apache.tamaya? I suspect that the various extensions would make use of > the current OSGi export naming convention for this, as with tamaya-core. If > this is something you'd like to have for the 0.4 release, I can also supply > a pull request for that. > > Also, I am happy to open JIRA issues for either or both of these items, > though I wasn't sure if you'd like to discuss either of these first. > > Thanks, > Aaron Coburn
