Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Any plans to modularize (or add Automatic-Module-Name properties to) protobuf-java? #3903

Closed
io7m opened this issue Nov 16, 2017 · 3 comments · Fixed by #6568
Closed

Any plans to modularize (or add Automatic-Module-Name properties to) protobuf-java? #3903

io7m opened this issue Nov 16, 2017 · 3 comments · Fixed by #6568

Comments

@io7m
Copy link

io7m commented Nov 16, 2017

Hello.

In order to play nicely with programs/libraries that have been modularized, it would be good if Automatic-Module-Name properties could be added to the protobuf-java jar files. This would give a stable name that can be used in the requires directives of modules.

http://blog.joda.org/2017/05/java-se-9-jpms-automatic-modules.html

Do not release to Maven Central a modular jar file that depends on an automatic module, unless the automatic module has an "Automatic-Module-Name" MANIFEST.MF entry.

I'd submit a PR, but I'm not sure what module names you'd want to use. Presumably something like com.google.protobuf.core and com.google.protobuf.lite.

@DJViking
Copy link

DJViking commented Jun 2, 2018

This is a very much needed change. Currently google protobuf is the only dependency we use that still has not been modularized.

@io7m
Copy link
Author

io7m commented Aug 30, 2019

Thank you!

@DJViking
Copy link

Adding Automatic-Module-Name is a step in the right direction. Fully modularize protobuf-java would be the next step.
A drastic shift was recently done for C++ when it moved to C++11, why not also shift Java towards Java LTS 11.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants