njbartlett at gmail.com
Wed Mar 15 19:18:19 UTC 2017
> On 15 Mar 2017, at 18:12, Stephen Colebourne <scolebourne at joda.org> wrote:
> On 15 March 2017 at 17:47, Alan Bateman <Alan.Bateman at oracle.com> wrote:
>> This is the consumer choosing a module name for a library that they don't
>> maintain and renaming that library to match (you are writing the `requires
>> X` before X exists). All I'm saying is that the library maintainer should be
>> the one that chooses the module name. In its absence then deriving the name
>> from from the library gives you a stable name in the short term.
> I agree that the library maintainer should choose the module name, but
> automatic modules will pretty much force consumers to do so, maing a
> mess. The proposal above is for the case where person A has randomly
> picked a modue name for a module that is not yet modularized, and
> person B has to do something to comply. The proposal simply suggests
> that the JPMS should not coonvert filename "bar-1.2.jar" to module
> name "bar" - the developer should do this instead by renaming the
Allowing consumers to choose module names is indeed a mess, but this is a mess created by automatic modules, not by Stephen’s proposal.
It does not make any sense to talk about the intentions of the “module author" in relation to automatic modules, because the author of the original library is not a module author! If they had authored a module then automatic modules would be moot.
> Anyway, I'll write up more on how to avoid automatic modules in another thread.
I look forward to reading this. I regard automatic modules as one of the most dangerous and poorly specified areas of the current spec, and will be taking this up with the other members of the EG.
More information about the jigsaw-dev