Personally - I don't care much. For my Eclipse e4 based applications, OSGi modularity works fine and I think it is actually quite good at what it does.
neljapäev, 19. juuli 2012 22:06.59 UTC+10 kirjutas Jan Goyvaerts: > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Jess Holle <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 7/19/2012 4:28 AM, Phil Haigh wrote: >> >> Having a large JRE isn't an issue for my server development work... >> >> >> Agreed. >> >> Jigsaw is lots of things: >> >> 1. A simple module system that is really well integrated into the >> Java language, compiler, and runtime >> 2. A modularization of the JVM itself >> 3. Removal of classpath configuration >> 4. Integrations with platform-specific deployment tooling >> >> None of these are really *critical* for Java's current bread-and-butter, >> which is server-side development work, of course. >> >> #1 would be very nice, though -- and I'd love to see just that delivered >> in Java 8, jettisoning the rest as fluff/frosting to be added in Java 9. >> It's unclear, however, how one could be sure the module system is adequate >> and won't need major rework in Java 9 without also tackling #2 in Java 8, >> so perhaps one would also need to tackle #2 in part for Java 8 in this case. >> >> #2, #3 and #4 seem like really, really low priority for server-side >> work. They are more important in terms of allowing Java to spread beyond >> (or at least not contract to) its bread and butter. They are key for >> allowing Java SE to be right-sized for lots of other environments. They >> would also apparently be key to any notion of replacing the antiquated Java >> ME with something better -- unless Oracle is simply going to concede mobile >> (including tablets) entirely to Android forever. [Personally I'd think >> Google and Oracle should actually be working *together* to grow dovetail >> Android and a right-sized/mobilized Java SE in the long term.] It's a sad >> statement for Oracle that they can't get their act together here before >> 2015 at the earliest. As a server-side developer, though, I have to say I >> don't really care *that* much. Just give me #1. >> >> As for #4, some of the deployment demos we saw at previous JavaOne's >> seemed truly irrelevant. Cool, but irrelevant. If time wasted in this >> area has held Jigsaw out of Java 8 that would be a real shame. >> >> Overall, if you *need* modularity today, there's obviously OSGi. If you >> don't *need* it, but it would be nice to have, then you're left torn >> between biting off the complexity of OSGi (it's certainly more complex than >> something integrated into the language, compiler, and JVM runtime) and >> putting modularity off until Oracle gets around to it someday in the hazy >> future (2017 after yet another delay?!?). >> >> -- >> Jess Holle >> >> P.S. I'm talking about modularity that impacts the *runtime*, of >> course. One can get *build-time* modularity in loads of ways, Maven >> being the prime example. >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Java Posse" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en. >> > > So, we're all Java enterprise application developers in here ? (I am btw) > > What do our Java desktop application developer colleagues in here thing > about this ? Because Jigsaw's delay probably impact them most. Or not ? > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/OTRxQ3bXVR4J. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
