On 13 Sep 2016, at 10:19, Emmanuel Bernard
<emmanuel(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
Hi all,
Sanne kindly pointed out to me the latest proposal by the OpenJDK team
around JDK 9 module and how they would handle frameworks needing access
to non exported types (Hibernate, dependency injection, etc).
If you are remotely into JDK9, please read it and provide feedback.
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jpms-spec-experts/2016-September/0...
It's better than before for sure. It feels to me that most applications
(the core of it) will end up being a weak module for this to work
though. I'm not sure whether it is good or bad, at least a isolation
concious person has the choice.
export private some.package;
Is essentially equivalent to what you can do for a given package in Java
8.
What I am less clear about is what relation Hibernate * projects really
need with a module containing the entities. Do we still this proposal
still mandates to use
requires hibernate.entitymanager;
requires hibernate.core;
in the targeted module?
Or would this be a usable module
module foo.bar {
exports private com.foo.bar.model;
requires javax.jpa;
// requires hibernate.entitymanager/core; no longer needed thanks to export
private?
}
Mark proposes that in a container (EE or anything controlling module loading
really), the container adds dynamically the addExports to the relevant
framework. But that looks like a solution to limit exports private
implications.
Comments?
Emmanuel
_______________________________________________
hibernate-dev mailing list
hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev