Hi Alan, thanks for your quick response!
Your explanation definitely makes sense. I've sent a follow up mail with the specification relevant parts of my question to the java-se-9-spec-experts mailing list [1]. Regards, Volker [1] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/java-se-9-spec-experts/2017-March/000016.html On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote: > On 27/03/2017 19:34, Volker Simonis wrote: > >> Where can I find the authoritative definition of the Java SE 9 module >> dependencies and relationships? > > JSR 379 / Java SE 9 isn't final yet so I think you'll have to use material > in the public review in the mean-time. > >> >> When I'm looking at the "Modular platform" [1] section of the "Java SE >> 9 Public Review Specification", I can see the "module graph". Its >> module dependencies seem to correspond to the Java 9 API documentation >> [2]. For the "java.desktop" package for example, both define >> "java.datatransfer" and "java.xml" as its transitive dependencies. >> However when I'm looking at the source code [3], I can see that >> "java.desktop" also requires "java.prefs" (non-transitively). Why is >> this dependency not recorded in the module graph and the API >> documentation? > > It's an implementation dependency. It doesn't influence the API that is > exposed when you require the java.desktop module. > >> >> For "java.corba" it seems even more confusing. The API documentation >> list "java.desktop" and "java.rmi" as transitively required, but also >> explicitly "java.datatransfer" and "java.xml" as "additionally >> required" modules, although they are implicitly reachable trough >> "java.desktop" anyway. On the other hand, the module-info of >> "java.corba" [5] only lists "java.desktop" and "java.rmi" as >> transitively required but not "java.datatransfer" and "java.xml". >> Additionally "java.logging", "java.naming" and "java.transaction" are >> required non-transitively (but these requirements are not recorded, >> neither in the module graph nor in the API documentation). > > org.omg.CORBA.ORB.init(Applet, Properties) is the reason why java.corba has > to `requires transitive java.desktop`. > > RMI-IIOP is part of the java.corba module and types from java.rmi are > exposed in the API, this is why it `requires transitive java.rmi`. > > The others are implementation dependences. The exception is the dependency > on java.transaction which requires digging into the Java Language to IDL > Mapping specification and the table that maps CORBA system exceptions to RMI > exceptions. > >> : >> >> 3. Is it acceptable for an "independent implementation" to add >> additional "requires" and/or "requires transitive" edges from a >> standard module to another standard module? > > I assume this will be covered by the documentation for certifying a Java SE > 9 implementation. > > However just to say that if you change module M to `requires transitive X` > then you expose the X API to whoever requires M. So I expect `requires > transitive` (or "implied readability" as it is termed) will feature in the > module graph equivalent of the signature test. > >> >> 4. Were can I find the authoritative package to module mapping >> mandated by the Java SE 9 standard? Is this just the current Java 9 >> API documentation? >> > Yes. > > -Alan
