On 13 February 2018 at 08:44, Yoann Rodiere <yoann(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
> IMO automatic module names should only be declared after at least
some
basic vetting that these modules will actually work when used as modules.
If that's not the case, I wouldn't add these headers, as users rightfully
may consider their presence as endorsement of using them as modules.
If I understood correctly, automatic module names were introduced to
facilitate the transition to Jigsaw modules. The point was to allow projects
to give a name to their modules, and, yes, declare them as ready, but even
if they couldn't be made full modules yet because of their dependencies.
Declaring a name doesn't mean the module will work, it means it will work
when dependencies are fixed. If we wait for all of our dependencies to work
in a modular environment before we give a name to our modules, we may very
well never do it because of circular dependencies (Infinispan comes to mind:
Infinispan-query depends on Search for, which depends on ORM, which depends
on the Infinispan 2nd level cache provider).
Declaring a full module-info.java is another matter, but as you mentioned,
we simply can't do that yet because of split packages in Lucene.
Understood and agree. We should add the automatic module names to get
people unstuck, and I wouldn't propose this if I didn't have enough
confidence that they should work: we have some basic tests.
Back to naming... It looks good and consistent with the current
naming our
Maven artifacts. In 6, I would probably choose to rename the Elasticsearch
one to something like
org.hibernate.search.<backendOrSomething>.elasticsearch, but we still have
to coin the right term for "<backendOrSomething>", and I would probably
rename the Maven artifact too, so that can wait.
I think you forgot the JSR 352 integration, but I guess the name would be
rather obvious:
- org.hibernate.search.jsr352
+1, thanks
As to non-public APIs, can you confirm automatic modules can access
the
classpath transparently? If so then I agree, no need to name those....
Except for the JMS backend: it is unusable without the user extending
AbstractJMSHibernateSearchController, so this class at least must be exposed
to the user. Even if it's just SPI.
That's the "guidelines" I was referring to in my first email.
We could give it a name, so let's suggest one, but I feel like this is
not essential as while we suggest people to extend our SPI, there are
alternatives to that.
I wanted to avoid this one at a first shot as it might be controversial ;)
Proposed name:
- org.hibernate.search.jms-support
Why:
# I'd like to avoid using "backend" in the name.
# Makes it clear this is the module you want to add when you're into
JMS - or at the opposite if your system doesn't care about JMS.
IMO the goal of Jigsaw modules is to trim a system from unnecessary
stuff, so having the names express what kind of technologies it brings
in is most helpful.
Thanks,
Sanne
On Tue, 13 Feb 2018 at 00:39 Sanne Grinovero
<sanne(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
>
> The split package problem with Lucene won't easily go away, as we
> can't upgrade Lucene now.
>
> But I vaguely remember working with you on that, didn't we figure out
> that one of the Lucene modules wasn't essential?
>
> Either way, that's interesting to experiment with but we can't publish
> full modules as almost none of our dependencies are ready; they should
> at least all have an automatic module name.
>
> Thanks,
> Sanne
>
> On 12 February 2018 at 19:43, Gunnar Morling <gunnar(a)hibernate.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 2018-02-12 19:28 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero <sanne(a)hibernate.org>:
> >>
> >> On 12 February 2018 at 18:00, Gunnar Morling <gunnar(a)hibernate.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 2018-02-12 17:55 GMT+01:00 Sanne Grinovero
<sanne(a)hibernate.org>:
> >> >>
> >> >> Picking automatic module names for Hibernate Search isn't going
to
> >> >> be
> >> >> straight-forward as our two main jars (hibernate-search-engine
&
> >> >> hibernate-search-orm) suffer from split package among them.
> >> >>
> >> >> We can't really fix the split package problem without breaking
all
> >> >> users, so if we want to consider that, we can debate it but that
> >> >> will
> >> >> need to happen at another round as we're doing a minor release,
so
> >> >> let's focus on:
> >> >> # Which names to pick
> >> >> # Should we pick the names at all
> >> >> # Which modules should have a name
> >> >>
> >> >> For a great background on the possible strategies and pitfalls I
> >> >> recommend reading Stephen Colebourne's blog on this subject
[1].
> >> >> He persuaded me there are good reasons to use the "reverse
DNS, the
> >> >> top level package", however since we have the split package
problem
> >> >> we
> >> >> can't simply go with that.
> >> >>
> >> >> Still, we can respect the principles he recommends with a small
> >> >> variation. It's fair to assume that the `org.hibernate.search`
> >> >> prefix
> >> >> is "ours"; since the nature of the suggestion is focused
on making
> >> >> sure there are no misunderstandings in the community about which
> >> >> names
> >> >> you can choose - as there is no central authority making sure
module
> >> >> names aren't clashing - we should be fine within Hibernate
projects
> >> >> with any `org.hibernate.X` prefix, as long as we coordinate and
> >> >> reach
> >> >> an agreement on this list.
> >> >>
> >> >> So, I propose we use:
> >> >>
> >> >> Engine module:
> >> >> - org.hibernate.search.engine
> >> >>
> >> >> ORM integration module:
> >> >> - org.hibernate.search.orm
> >> >>
> >> > Those names sound good to me.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> JGroups, JMS backends:
> >> >> [ no automatic module name ? Excepting some
"guidelines" in the
> >> >> JMS
> >> >> module, these are not public API so nobody would benefit from it -
> >> >> also we think we might want to phase out the name
"backend" in the
> >> >> future ]
> >> >>
> >> >> Elasticsearch integration module
> >> >> [hibernate-search-elasticsearch.jar]:
> >> >> - org.hibernate.search.elasticsearch
> >> >>
> >> >> Elasticsearch / AWS security integration:
> >> >> [ no automatic module name: no public API ]
> >> >>
> >> >> Serialization / Avro
> >> >> [ no automatic module name: no public API ]
> >> >>
> >> >> WDYT?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > The user may still need to reference those modules when launching a
> >> > modularized application. Also if they don't directly declare say
the
> >> > JMS
> >> > backend as a dependence of their own module, they'd still have to
> >> > specify it
> >> > via --add-modules, so to resolve these additional modules and add
> >> > them
> >> > to
> >> > the module graph. Hence I'd declare automatic module names for
these,
> >> > too.
> >>
> >> Good point, I had not thought that our modules wouldn't be able to
> >> load other extensions from classpath.
> >>
> >> >> We could also pick names for the ones which I've listed as
"no
> >> >> public
> >> >> API" but I see no point: as we're only assigning an
"Automatic
> >> >> Module
> >> >> Name" we won't be able to explicitly state that the other
modules
> >> >> depend on these. So nobody will use them, and things are a bit in
> >> >> flux
> >> >> anyway in this area because of Hibernate Search 6 plans.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I don't fully understand this paragraph.
> >>
> >> You mostly invalidated it with the previous comment, but what I meant
> >> is that we can't have the `org.hibernate.search.engine` declare a
> >> dependency on any implementation module, as we're not adding a
> >> module-info definition.
> >>
> >> >> Another optional altogether: since we have split packages which
> >> >> we'll
> >> >> have to resolve before we can actually transform these into fully
> >> >> fledged modules, I think an acceptable position is also to say we
> >> >> won't be publishing any automatic module name yet. Personally
I'm
> >> >> inclined to go with the names suggested above, at least some
others
> >> >> can start making baby steps, even if it's not all there.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > IMO automatic module names should only be declared after at least
> >> > some
> >> > basic
> >> > vetting that these modules will actually work when used as modules.
> >> > If
> >> > that's not the case, I wouldn't add these headers, as users
> >> > rightfully
> >> > may
> >> > consider their presence as endorsement of using them as modules.
> >> >
> >> > That said, I can't seem to find split packages between engine and
> >> > orm.
> >> > In
> >> > fact I can launch an application with both of them on the module path
> >> > just
> >> > fine. So there may be no problem actually?
> >>
> >> Interesting, I'm pretty sure we had some. We had several issues
> >> resolved over time to resolve them, I never realized we might have
> >> completed them all. The "line" defining what belongs where is
still
> >> blurry though, we should make sure this won't have future regressions.
> >
> >
> > Where I had problems with split packages was when exploring HSearch @
> > Java 9
> > modules last year was Lucene. In the version used back then (not sure
> > whether it's still an issue today), there was a split package between
> > Lucene's core and the util module (the one with the uninverting reader).
> >
> > You might take my example project I had created for running ORM as
> > modules
> >
> >
(
https://github.com/gunnarmorling/hibernate-orm-on-java9-modules/compare/o...)
> > if you're interested in doing the same for HSearch. IIRC, the Lucene
> > split
> > package made me give up back then, it's surely worth taking another look
> > with the current versions in use.
> >>
> >>
> >> I'll see if we can produce fully fledged module-info descriptors then
> >> :)
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> # What I don't like:
> >> >> For one, that the typical application will need to import both
> >> >> `org.hibernate.search.engine` and `org.hibernate.search.orm`, and
> >> >> likely more as well (e.g. Elasticsearch API, Lucene API module is
> >> >> coming, ..).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "import" here. But
if it's
> >> > about
> >> > the
> >> > user having to declare dependences in their module descriptor to
> >> > o.h.s.engine and o.h.s.orm modules, you may consider to make the
> >> > former
> >> > a
> >> > transitive dependence of the latter once you add actual module
> >> > descriptors:
> >> >
> >> > module org.hibernate.search.orm {
> >> > requires transitive org.hibernate.search.engine;
> >> > ...
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > That way the user just has to add declare the dependence to
> >> > o.h.s.orm.
> >> > That's definitely suitable if APIs in o.h.s.orm use types from
engine
> >> > in
> >> > their public API signatures.
> >>
> >> +1 that's the better option.
> >>
> >> My thought was about automatic module names though, but totally
> >> irrelevant if we go for full modules.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Sanne
> >>
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Maybe similar to BOM's today we could publish a module which
> >> >> statically imports multiple of these, that could be nicer to use
but
> >> >> we risk needing to publish (and document) one for each of a
> >> >> selection
> >> >> of combinations. So let's not start with such things yet.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Sanne
> >> >>
> >> >> [1]
> >> >>
http://blog.joda.org/2017/05/java-se-9-jpms-automatic-modules.html
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> hibernate-dev mailing list
> >> >> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> >> >>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> hibernate-dev mailing list
> hibernate-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
--
Yoann Rodiere
yoann(a)hibernate.org / yrodiere(a)redhat.com
Software Engineer
Hibernate NoORM team