These are chat archives for atomix/atomix

23rd
Dec 2017
Johno Crawford
@johnou
Dec 23 2017 15:45
Johno Crawford
@johnou
Dec 23 2017 16:28
@kuujo this might explain some weird issues.. :)
Zachary Heilbron
@zheilbron
Dec 23 2017 21:21
@johnou There are still duplicate classes.
For this strategy to work, every sub-project needs to export only its classes and the core project needs to exclude the union of all sub-project's exports (including the transitively dependent sub-projects).
Zachary Heilbron
@zheilbron
Dec 23 2017 21:27
It might be easier to just name-space the core classes as you originally suggested (e.g. io.atomix.core). Then, have every project just export its relevant packages.
Johno Crawford
@johnou
Dec 23 2017 22:18
@zheilbron are you sure?
Zachary Heilbron
@zheilbron
Dec 23 2017 22:18
Yeah, I just tried it locally
Johno Crawford
@johnou
Dec 23 2017 22:19
what class
Screenshot from 2017-12-23 23-18-44.png
Zachary Heilbron
@zheilbron
Dec 23 2017 22:19
The classes in io.atomix.messaging
I just tried the other method of namespacing core and it does the correct thing
Jordan Halterman
@kuujo
Dec 23 2017 22:20
I'm fine with io.atomix.core
Zachary Heilbron
@zheilbron
Dec 23 2017 22:21
It's also easier to maintain since any added package does not need to also be maintained in core/pom
I just created a PR that includes @johnou's commit along with the core changes, just so you have a reference for what worked for me. Feel free to rebase/squash or get rid of the PR if you want to handle it.
Johno Crawford
@johnou
Dec 23 2017 22:25
it's tricky to test because 2.1.0-SNAPSHOT exists in sonatype
that's why the test module compiles even though it references dead modules
but yes I agree moving everything to core would simplify the configuration
Jordan Halterman
@kuujo
Dec 23 2017 23:06
:clap: thanks! I'll merge it after I'm done last minute Christmas shopping :-P