When you run the release plugin the artifact is deployed when the module gets to the deploy phase. Thus any shading would take place too late to do any good. It could be done if we renamed log4j-api to something else and then disable the deploy in the module. Then the new log4j-api could create the jar. But this all seems messier than what is there now. If you ignore the Java 9 stuff it should just work in the IDE.
Ralph > On May 21, 2017, at 4:50 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> On May 22, 2017, at 5:30, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >> >> I’m not sure how to make it be any better than this. Although the Java 9 >> classes could be removed we would just have to put them back in a couple of >> months when Java 9 is released. Putting them in a separate module is not a >> great option as that will require an additional jar to run in Java 9. > > Putting the Java 9 classes in a separate module has several advantages. It > would allow IDE's to function in a standard way. It would also make very > clear which JDKs are required to build the project and remove the need for > the toolchain workaround. > > Together these make the project more approachable for new contributors which > I feel is important for the long term of the project. > > What remains is a matter of convincing Maven to do what we need: > * we _don't_ want this new module to result in a separate artifact in the > distribution. Seems doable: we already do this with log4j-perf. > * we _do_ want the Java 9 classes to be included in the log4j-api artifact. I > hope we can do this with maven-shade? > > Does this make sense? > > Remko > > (Shameless plug) Every java main() method deserves http://picocli.info > >> >> Ralph >> >>> On May 21, 2017, at 1:14 PM, Mikael Ståldal <mik...@staldal.nu> wrote: >>> >>> Same with IntelliJ IDEA. You can set JRE per module (such as log4j-api, >>> log4j-core), but not per source folder. >>> >>> So this is not enough to fix it. But it is better than nothing, so please >>> keep it. And do the same for tests if/when we add any tests for the code in >>> src/main/java9. >>> >>> I am now able to continue to work with the project in IntelliJ IDEA by >>> excluding src/main/java9. (But if I work with the Java 9 stuff, I only have >>> a text editor with syntax highlighting, no other IDE support for that part.) >>> >>> >>>> On 2017-05-21 14:50, Gary Gregory wrote: >>>> I set the JRE for that project to Java 9. I do not think you can set the >>>> JRE per source folder, only per project. >>>> Gary >>>> On May 21, 2017 1:29 AM, "Ralph Goers" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: >>>> I’ve modified the build to put the Java 9 classes of the API into a >>>> separate source directory. Can you see if that helps things in Eclipse? >>>> Ralph >> >> >
