Doh...sorry, right.
Ken,
Tongue in cheek answer: so that I become a little less stupid about
modern java...see above. :)
Real answer: _if_ we can pull it off, given that we plan to
modularize our parsers anyways, it would be nice to use the language
support in java >= 9 for actual modularity. I know we have to fix some
split packages and possibly rename some of our packages.
I _might_ find some time soon to focus on merging Bob’s awesome 2.0
work into master, and I thought it would be a good time to try it.
Nick,
This is good to know. Thank you!
Cheers,
Tim
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 4:59 PM Nick Burch <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 19/06/18 20:46, Tim Allison wrote:
> > What would you think of requiring Java 10 to build Tika 2.0 but still
> > setting 8 as the target? This would allow us to bake modularity in now.
> > Given that I haven't actually tried modularizing/jigsawizing Tika yet,
> this
> > could be a complete disaster, of course. :)
>
> I'm not sure how well it'd work given that most of our dependencies
> aren't java module-ized?
>
> David North (from POI) has done quite a bit on java modules for existing
> codebases, and hit some snags, and IIRC commons have had problems too. I
> don't mind either way though!
>
> Nick
>
