On 16/05/2016 16:19, Uwe Schindler wrote:
Thanks Alan,
so this means we should better remove the references to the mentioned class
from the Apache Solr code if not needed (I don't think we need the Java EE
features here, it might be an oversight). I just wonder why Javac succeeded in
our case to build. I have to dig.
For now I added "-addmods java.se.ee" to our build server's testing Java
configuration, to be able to test build 118.
Good.
Is it planned to have those classes disabled for pre-Java-9 apps by default in Java 9?
Would't it be better for standard unnamed classpath apps to "fall back" in a
backwards compatible way?
Once JEP 261 is update then I hope the rational will be clearer. It's
not really a problem to resolve java.xml.bind and java.activation by
default, the others are problems though.
In addition, the Javadocs don't say anything about which modules are visible by
default. I think this should be added, too.
I think TBD, partly because this is really JDK policy.
-Alan
