+0, from my window module is a generic term whereas project brings a semantic which is regularly wrong for maven. Build-segment is ugly but more accurate. For me there is no real ambiguity with jpms since we cant use "module" for jpms since it is not specific enough and would be worse and ambiguous (keep in mind with new type system we'll get go-module for ex). So +0 to keep module since project does not solve the issue and +1 to name properly types to avoid to overlap with it.
Le mer. 14 août 2024 à 00:04, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> a écrit : > I agree with Guillaume. This is just an alias with a deprecation warning or > a plain rename. Either way would be OK with me. > > Gary > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2024, 5:49 PM Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Le mar. 13 août 2024 à 23:43, Elliotte Rusty Harold > > <elh...@ibiblio.org> a écrit : > > > > > > I agree this is a problem. Not the first time that a new Java language > > > feature has caused problems for much existing code. Who else remembers > > > that JUnit's assertTrue used to be simply assert? That was an ugly > > > one. > > > > > > In this case, I'm not yet sold that the cure isn't worse than the > > > disease. In particular I'm not sure a change in the pom format is > > > justified. There's too much existing code, documentation, tooling, > > > and, most importantly, knowledge inside developers' heads to make > > > this change pain free. If we were starting from a green field, then > > > this would certainly make sense, but since we're not I think there'll > > > be less pain by sticking with the status quo. > > > > I think there are already a bunch of changes in the coming 4.1.0 POM > > which external tools are not yet ready to handle. The whole > > raw->build transformation provides a few things which are definitely > > not supported by any tool. > > As you see with https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/1651, all ITs > > still work unchanged, so this would give ample time for tools to adapt > > as I don't expect a massive and immediate switch to the new features > > provided by 4.1.0 POM. > > If we don't take the opportunity that is given now, not sure if there > > will be another one. > > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 8:14 AM Martin Desruisseaux > > > <martin.desruisse...@geomatys.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > In order to avoid confusion between "Maven module" and "Java > module", I > > > > suggest to update documentation for using "Maven sub-project" instead > > of > > > > "Maven module". However, the <module> XML elements in the POM would > be > > > > unchanged for compatibility reason. There is apparently not so many > > > > places in the documentation that need to be updated. The ones that I > > > > found are part of pull request #1625: > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/1625/commits/4bc46b4114396e6025645f3c5dae888f3d386981 > > > > > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Elliotte Rusty Harold > > > elh...@ibiblio.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > -- > > ------------------------ > > Guillaume Nodet > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > >
