On 12/04/2015 10:15 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 04/12/2015 15:52, David M. Lloyd wrote:
Ah, yeah specifically I'm referring to splitting/merging or upgrading
some given module in an existing system, possibly using aggregate
modules for compatibility or alternatively updating the module
descriptors of existing installed modules to accommodate the new
layout (both cases seem reasonable to me, and we have done both). The
phrase in the original email from Alex that I was responding to was
"We don't think the module declaration will be as fluid as you do";
however our real-world experience shows the opposite.
I don't think I understand what you mean by "new layout". Do you mean
file paths? I assume not because module declarations list the
dependences as module names. Or maybe you mean there are incompatible
changes to modules that impact consumers of those modules?
No, I mean the module graph's new layout when new modules are added or
split, which necessitates a module descriptor update to match the
intended new layout. Maybe "topology" is a better term.
--
- DML
