desruisseaux commented on PR #11549: URL: https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/11549#issuecomment-3659729535
> I don't see in https://github.com/apache/maven-jar-plugin/tree/master/src/it An integration test is provided with the https://github.com/apache/maven-jar-plugin/pull/508 pull request, but it depends on this PR. For other plugins, the current state is in the link provided by Gerd in above comment. > Is there a common sample modular sources project that is used to test all these changes in a common team approach? In addition to the samples given by Gerd in above comment, I use a [clone of the Apache SIS project](https://github.com/Geomatys/sis/tree/maven4) where the Gradle build has been replaced by Maven 4. The features tested are: * Compilation of main code. * Compilation of test code with `module-info-patch.maven`. * Creation of JAR files (using the above-cited pull request). * Some modules targeting different Java version. The result is much better than what we could achieve by hacking the Gradle build. In particular, we had to create some `org.apache.sis.test` modules only for adding `module-info` managing the dependencies in a way that we couldn't achieve with Gradle configuration. This hack is gone with Maven 4, the build has never been so clean. > from Maven core perspective, does it target Maven 4.1 only, or is it expected to be backported to some previous branches? The work is backported to 4.0.x, but as Guillaume said, the changes that are done in Maven core are small adjustments. The biggest changes where done about one year ago, with the introduction of `<source>` element and the use of `<type>` for controlling the path where to put dependencies. Now, the largest works are in plugins. > we'll need to keep https://github.com/Geomatys/maven/wiki at Maven level Yes, this is also planed. I already started an updated version of the user guide, but I'm not sure where to put it as it is of wider scope than only the compiler plugin. >> With one Maven project producing many modular jars based on their modular source structure, now I get that there will be artifactIds deducted from module name in modular sources I hope we'll check that there is no conflict between MavenProjects and attachements to a modular build, as an attachment could be done at both levels > Good point. This has to be checked. This would mean we have conflicting module names somehow I suppose. Indeed, a check would be desirable, maybe in a separated pull request. For now, the risk is slightly reduced by naming tradition (not a formal convention), as Maven artifacts often have a `-` in their name, which is illegal in a Java module name. -- 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: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
