[jsr294-modularity-eg] Problems for JSR 294 to address

[Alex Buckley]

OK, problem solved. -eg members are not usually -observer members, so 
-observer dropped their mail when it came over from -eg. -observer has a 
special list of non-members allowed to post, which I needed to update.

All -eg traffic should now come to -observer. Two mails from Peter 
Kriens, two from Daniel Leuck, and one from Richard Hall that didn't 
make it to -observer are visible in the EG List Archives at 
http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/jsr294-modularity-observer.

Sorry about that,

Alex

Alex Buckley wrote:
> Looking into it. Mine and Michal's mails from -eg are making it to 
> -observer but not Peter's or Sam's.
> 
> Alex
> 
> P.S. Welcome to the 23 new subscribers to -observer today :-)
> 
> Thomas Watson wrote:
>> It seems the observer list is only getting sporadic messages. I see 
>> you answering questions to posts from the EG mailing list but the 
>> observer list did not get the original post. Is this simply a timing 
>> issue because the observer list only recently started posting messages 
>> from the EG list?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>>
>>
>> Inactive hide details for Alex Buckley ---01/27/2009 08:07:33 
>> PM---Daniel Leuck wrote:Alex Buckley ---01/27/2009 08:07:33 
>> PM---Daniel Leuck wrote:
>>
>>
>> From:   
>> Alex Buckley <Alex.Buckley at sun.com>
>>
>> To:   
>> JSR 294 Expert Group <jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu>
>>
>> Date:   
>> 01/27/2009 08:07 PM
>>
>> Subject:   
>> Re: [jsr294-modularity-eg] Problems for JSR 294 to address
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> Daniel Leuck wrote:
>>  >> Interestingly, in my
>>  >> understanding, .NET makes such a distinction between the 
>> modularity of a
>>  >> delivery unit (called an assembly) and the finer grained 
>> modularity inside a
>>  >> delivery unit, represented by namespaces. The "internal" keyword 
>> indicates
>>  >> that the artifact is visible only inside an assembly and the 
>> "namespace"
>>  >> keyword provides a hierarchical namespace.
>>  >
>>  > That is correct, and I think the "internal" visibility specifier in C#
>>  > makes more sense than what we currently have in java. I think
>>  > visibility within a module is probably the most commonly required
>>  > level after public and private.
>>
>> +1. Also, I have toyed with the idea of allowing "package" to be used as
>> an accessibility modifier on a class, interface, or member. When people
>> have the option of always giving an accessibility modifier, we can
>> discourage declarations without one, and encourage people to consider
>> module-private rather than package-private when choosing a modifier.
>> (Clearly we can't change the default level of accessibility to be
>> module-private now.)
>>
>> Alex
>> _______________________________________________
>> jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
>> jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
>> http://cs.oswego.edu/mailman/listinfo/jsr294-modularity-eg
>>
>>