>>>> It exists purely because another class in the same versioned directory >>>> depends on it. If we are creating a versionedStream for the version that >>>> the non-public class is in, it will be in finalNames, otherwise it won’t >>>> be. I believe the code is correct here. >>>> >>>> New concealed packages can be added in a versioned section of the jar file >>>> created by jar tool. Should classes in concealed packages be added to >>>> finalNames or not? Or stated differently, for jlink, should a >>>> versionedStream contain entries in concealed packages? >>>> >>> Er, I thought the plan was for the set of concealed packages to be the >>> same. It's okay for the ConcealedPackages in the base section to include >>> "empty" packages. >> >> I wasn’t involved with that decision. Chris wrote that code, perhaps he can >> comment. > > This surprises me, as I have the same recollection as Alan; no additional > concealed packages are allowable in the versioned section. > > I just checked the jar tool, and it does NOT add any versioned specific > concealed packages.
You’re right. Apparently when I read the code this morning, I hadn’t had enough coffee yet ;-)
