Mark,
On 11/5/20 14:59, Mark Thomas wrote:
Woot!
The great folks at bnd have fixed this. It means depending on a snapshot
but compared to the disruption of the alternatives I think that is
acceptable for the short term.
The issue with depending on a snapshot is reproducibility of builds. The
On 06/11/2020 10:15, Rémy Maucherat wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 9:00 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
>
>> Woot!
>>
>> The great folks at bnd have fixed this. It means depending on a snapshot
>> but compared to the disruption of the alternatives I think that is
>> acceptable for the short term.
>>
>>
On Thu, Nov 5, 2020 at 9:00 PM Mark Thomas wrote:
> Woot!
>
> The great folks at bnd have fixed this. It means depending on a snapshot
> but compared to the disruption of the alternatives I think that is
> acceptable for the short term.
>
> The issue with depending on a snapshot is
Woot!
The great folks at bnd have fixed this. It means depending on a snapshot
but compared to the disruption of the alternatives I think that is
acceptable for the short term.
The issue with depending on a snapshot is reproducibility of builds. The
simplest option (and infra seem OK with it) is
All,
The summary:
- The JVM spec states that the ModulePackages attribute in
module-info.class DOES NOT have to list ALL packages in the module
- bnd is consistent with the JVM spec and only lists the packages that
are required to be listed
- the JRE uses a broken class loader optimisation
