[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJLINK-27?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Gili updated MJLINK-27:
-----------------------
Description:
Karl Heinz Marbaise closed MJLINK-7 referencing [a Stackoverflow
post|https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46573572/java-9-possible-to-have-2-modules-with-same-name-on-module-path/46574200#46574200]
to prove that module names must be unique. In fact, this Stackoverflow post
says the exact opposite. The bottom half of the post states that modules in
separate directories **are** allowed to have the same name. The bottom of the
post concludes:
{quote}That makes it possible to have the same module in different directories.
{quote}
It doesn't have to be the same module per-se. It is possible for two different
implementations with the same module name to reside on the module path, so long
as the modules reside in different directory. This is useful for "class
shadowing". In my particular case, I ship a no-op implementation of a module by
default but users can insert a working implementation in front of the module
path to enable the feature.
Please reopen this issue or continue its work here.
was:
Karl Heinz Marbaise closed MJLINK-7 referencing [a Stackoverflow
post|https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46573572/java-9-possible-to-have-2-modules-with-same-name-on-module-path/46574200#46574200]
to prove that module names must be unique. In fact, this Stackoverflow post
says the exact opposite. The bottom half of the post states that modules in
separate directories **are** allowed to have the same name.
Please reopen this issue or continue its work here.
> Code incorrectly assumes that two modules won't have the same name
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MJLINK-27
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MJLINK-27
> Project: Maven JLink Plugin
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0-alpha-2
> Reporter: Gili
> Priority: Major
>
> Karl Heinz Marbaise closed MJLINK-7 referencing [a Stackoverflow
> post|https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46573572/java-9-possible-to-have-2-modules-with-same-name-on-module-path/46574200#46574200]
> to prove that module names must be unique. In fact, this Stackoverflow post
> says the exact opposite. The bottom half of the post states that modules in
> separate directories **are** allowed to have the same name. The bottom of the
> post concludes:
> {quote}That makes it possible to have the same module in different
> directories.
> {quote}
> It doesn't have to be the same module per-se. It is possible for two
> different implementations with the same module name to reside on the module
> path, so long as the modules reside in different directory. This is useful
> for "class shadowing". In my particular case, I ship a no-op implementation
> of a module by default but users can insert a working implementation in front
> of the module path to enable the feature.
> Please reopen this issue or continue its work here.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
