[9] Review Request: 8056298 Separate java.awt.datatransfer from the desktop module

[Alan Bateman]

On 12/01/2015 20:50, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
> On 12.01.2015 23:42, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> On 12/01/2015 20:29, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>>> Hello.
>>> Please review a fix for jdk 9.
>>> In the fix a sun.datatransfer and a java.awt.datatransfer packages 
>>> were moved to the separate module java.datatransfer.
>>> But sun.awt.datatransfer still located in java.desktop. I tested 
>>> full jdk(all modules included) on osx using a jck, and it works 
>>> without problems, at least no new issues were found. But 
>>> datatransfer area is quite unstable after a bunch of the latest fixes.
>>> I still cannot replace java.desktop in modules.xml, because of some 
>>> another dependencies(See comments in the bug)
>>>
>>> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8056298
>>> Webrev can be found at:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.01/jdk/webrev.01
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/8056298/webrev.01/root/webrev.01
>>>
>> Thanks for doing this. I think it looks okay except for modules.xml 
>> where it looks like there may be a few issues.
>>
>> 1. You've updated the definition of java.corba to depend on 
>> java.datatransfer but I don't think this is needed (is there code in 
>> java.corba that uses this API?).
>>
>> 2. Same thing needs to be checked in java.xml.bind, jdk.jconsole and 
>> jdk.runtime where it's not clear to me that code in these modules 
>> uses this API.
> You are right, that's seems unnecessary, i will double check and 
> resend a new version.
>>
>> 2. The update to java.activation to depend on java.datatransfer looks 
>> right but shouldn't you drop the dependency on java.desktop?
> java.activation depends on java.beans also
Ah yes, I'd forgotten about that. We have JDK-8047773 to track 
addressing that dependency.

-Alan.