Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Strictly name the org.json module for JLink and JPackage #4

Open
wants to merge 13 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

GedMarc
Copy link

@GedMarc GedMarc commented Aug 8, 2019

Enable JPMS for Library

stleary#451

@johnjaylward
Copy link

johnjaylward commented Aug 20, 2019

I've not used maven in a long while, nor have experience setting up modules, but from what I've learned so far this is straightforward and should work as expected.

In short, if @BGehrels is OK with these changes, I see no reason to hold them back. @stleary do you have any direct feedback?

@stleary
Copy link

stleary commented Aug 20, 2019

@GedMarc @johnjaylward @BGehrels No objection on my part.
Let's get on the same page regarding releases. If any valid user complaints emerge, I would ask that the release be immediately replaced with a new release that does not contain this PR.

@GedMarc
Copy link
Author

GedMarc commented Aug 20, 2019

@stleary @johnjaylward @BGehrels
Thank you for the updates, I have updated the module-info to be placed inside the multi-release location for backwards compatibility concerns.

I believe this is a good release candidate.

@GedMarc
Copy link
Author

GedMarc commented Aug 27, 2019

......

@GedMarc
Copy link
Author

GedMarc commented Sep 6, 2019

whatever

@GedMarc GedMarc closed this Sep 6, 2019
@johnjaylward
Copy link

@BGehrels @stleary can you comment on these changes? Are they approved to go? Are there any corrections you can see that need to be made? It's disappointing that @GedMarc's contributions seem to have been ignored again.

@BGehrels
Copy link
Owner

BGehrels commented Sep 8, 2019

@GedMarc I shit, i'm sorry, haven't seen or expected this PR, notifications were drowning in my Github mailfilter, i'll have a look at them!

#mkdir -p $MODITECT_FOLDER
# Copy the module-info to the dist folder to build
#cp src/moditect/module-info.java $MODITECT_FOLDER/module-info.java
#echo "Copied the module info file"
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What about these 4 lines? Are they neccessary, not neccessary or optional? Or are there conditions when they should be enabled?

@BGehrels BGehrels reopened this Sep 8, 2019
@BGehrels
Copy link
Owner

BGehrels commented Sep 8, 2019

Did you test these changes with Java 8 and Java 9 in a Module/No-Module Scenario?

<configuration>
<!-- Put module-info.class in META-INF/versions/9 to maximize backwards compat -->
<!-- See: https://github.com/moditect/moditect/issues/67 -->
<jvmVersion>9</jvmVersion>
Copy link
Owner

@BGehrels BGehrels Sep 8, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Will this automatically be available for Java 10, 11 and 12 then?

<configuration>
<source>%%JAVAVERSION%%</source>
<target>%%JAVAVERSION%%</target>
<!--<source>1.6</source>
<target>1.6</target>-->
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With this, target is now defined twice

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ahh, no, sorry, it's a block comment...

Could you remove the commented out code here?

<artifactId>asm</artifactId>
<version>7.0</version>
</dependency>
</dependencies>
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you add a comment to the pom why this new dependency is needed here?

@@ -97,7 +97,19 @@
</dependency>
</dependencies>

<build>
<!-- Allow finding fixed moditect version -->
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you please extend this comment in a way that it somehow says when the snapshot repository can be removed again? Something like: "Remove this when we have an official moditect release containing bugfix X". Or "Remove this when modditect version x is released"?

@jordanamr
Copy link

No news from PR author ? :(

@GedMarc
Copy link
Author

GedMarc commented Dec 27, 2019

@jordanamr unfortunately a lot of these reviews are subject to the actual build cycle and depending on how the build and deploy happens, depends on what the correct implementation is.

the module-info file and source itself however are fully intact and being used pretty much everywhere for me - 4 production clients

https://search.maven.org/artifact/com.guicedee.services/json

@GedMarc
Copy link
Author

GedMarc commented Dec 27, 2019

Although the version is changing (with the encapsulating guicedee project) it is fully in-sync with source

@stleary
Copy link

stleary commented Jan 4, 2020

@GedMarc can you please respond to each review comment? Once @BGehrels is satisfied the PR is acceptable, it is OK with me to proceed with a release. However, if any users complain that this breaks their build, the changes will have to be backed out and a new release made.

@GedMarc
Copy link
Author

GedMarc commented Jan 4, 2020

@stleary it's been 2 years with two of these, we've already released 1.0 and have decided to not include anything below jdk 8 support and have standardized on jdk 11
the changes are very basic and with a bit of effort and perhaps a test on the build with jdk 6 shouldn't take long at all to resolve anything that is incorrect,
not really keen on going back to this branch.

Thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants