[jsr294-modularity-eg] Simple Module System Proposal
peter.kriens at aqute.biz
Tue Sep 29 13:49:30 EDT 2009
I think we're having a bit of a dead lock. Is there an anyway we can
have a call to discuss these issues? I also like to know where Bob and
On 29 sep 2009, at 18:55, Alex Buckley wrote:
> Richard S. Hall wrote:
>> On 9/24/09 20:16, Alex Buckley wrote:
>>> If Maven suffices for versioning and dependency tracking - not
>>> "real" modularity but still of some value, in your view - why does
>>> the Simple Module System claim the same ground by standardizing
>>> versions and dependencies in the language?
>> To me, this line of discussion completely misses the important
>> point. If 294 modules are required to be loaded by a single class
>> loader, then they are useless in any environments that are either
>> dynamic or support side-by-side versions, which throws their reuse
>> out the window. Thus, there is very little benefit of the SMS
>> proposal over the "big hook" approach.
> "big hook" approach?
> jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
> jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
jsr294-modularity-eg mailing list
jsr294-modularity-eg at cs.oswego.edu
More information about the jsr294-modularity-observer