I can second that by an example using Groovy. We have not yet taken
steps to make jigsaw modules, but we quite some time ago we have split
the code base in what would become eventually become modules in the
future. Because of history this did mean to split packages. So we have a
couple of jars
2015-10-30 18:02 GMT+01:00 Alan Bateman :
>
> JDK-8138878 seems to be JSOM hacking into private field in
> java.awt.Toolkit. It is possible to discuss the issue on awt-dev and
> i18n-dev to see if the changing locale scenario is meant to work?
>
>
Yes, this is a hack we found in the Sun bug databa
On 30.10.2015 18:02, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 30/10/2015 15:29, Vincent Privat wrote:
> :
>
> Concerning Jigsaw:
> - We have reported 3 bugs. All made it to the public JIRA: 8138878,
> 8140477, 8140481. The second one is a bit problematic for our tests as
> it basically kills our Jenkins instance
On 30/10/2015 15:29, Vincent Privat wrote:
:
Concerning Jigsaw:
- We have reported 3 bugs. All made it to the public JIRA: 8138878,
8140477, 8140481. The second one is a bit problematic for our tests as
it basically kills our Jenkins instance. I see the two other ones are
understood/in prog
On 30/10/2015 11:28, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
:
Here are three cases that appear to be troubled by these restrictions:
- a large project that has taken an existing project (module) and
split it in two. In order to preserve backwards compatibility, the
author wants to retain the package names.
Thanks for reporting these issues.
> On Oct 30, 2015, at 8:29 AM, Vincent Privat
> wrote:
>
> Concerning Jigsaw:
> - We have reported 3 bugs. All made it to the public JIRA: 8138878,
> 8140477, 8140481. The second one is a bit problematic for our tests as it
> basically kills our Jenkins instan
On 30/10/2015 15:29, Vincent Privat wrote:
Hi,
Following the recent inclusion of JOSM to the Quality Outreach list by
the Adoption Group, we have compiled every single Java issue we have
encountered, and reported when it was new, for the latest versions of
Java, on a single page:
https://j
Hi,
Following the recent inclusion of JOSM to the Quality Outreach list by the
Adoption Group, we have compiled every single Java issue we have
encountered, and reported when it was new, for the latest versions of Java,
on a single page:
https://josm.openstreetmap.de/wiki/JavaBugs
We will use thi
On 10/30/2015 04:12 AM, Martin Lehmann wrote:
Hi David, hi all,
thanks, David, for your response.
Sure, reply is inline.
Full ACK. Bad practice.
I disagree, actually. I think that this is a completely needless and
artificial restriction that arose from implementation decisions, not from a
On 29 October 2015 at 13:48, Alan Bateman wrote:
> The restriction is that no two modules with the same package (irrespective
> of whether it is exported or not, or who reads the modules) can be mapped to
> the same class loader.
FWIW, I think that this could be a headache for module adoption.
H
Hi David, hi all,
thanks, David, for your response.
>> Full ACK. Bad practice.
>I disagree, actually. I think that this is a completely needless and
>artificial restriction that arose from implementation decisions, not from a
>valid requirement.
You have a point. I don't disagree ;-)
>> So we
I watched some on iPad - I had to crank volume to the max to hear Alan - but it
was possible.
Ivan
> On 29 Oct 2015, at 09:44, Sundararajan Athijegannathan
> wrote:
>
> I watched all the 4 talks - audio is fine.
>
> -Sundar
>
>> On 10/29/2015 12:08 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
>> since it se
12 matches
Mail list logo
