Alternatives for naming automatic modules, and a proposal (#AutomaticModuleNames)

[mark.reinhold at oracle.com]

2017/4/4 2:38:37 -0700, Brian Fox <brianf at infinity.nu>:
> Mark I think some of the assertions on the prevalence of the pom.properties
> is wrong. We pulled our own top 20 list based on download popularity and
> you can see it lines up well with your cited article:
> 
>   count  |         group_name         |    artifact_name
> ---------+----------------------------+---------------------
>  9620458 | junit                      | junit
>  7660971 | org.slf4j                  | slf4j-api
>  5608458 | log4j                      | log4j
>  5542626 | commons-codec              | commons-codec
>  5389851 | com.google.guava           | guava
>  5357355 | commons-io                 | commons-io
>  5177092 | commons-logging            | commons-logging
>  4936300 | org.apache.httpcomponents  | httpclient
>  4874902 | org.apache.httpcomponents  | httpcore
>  4756847 | commons-cli                | commons-cli
>  4577052 | org.apache.commons         | commons-lang3
>  4508856 | commons-lang               | commons-lang
>  4430776 | com.fasterxml.jackson.core | jackson-core
>  4280673 | com.fasterxml.jackson.core | jackson-databind
>  4270501 | com.google.code.findbugs   | jsr305
>  4140850 | com.fasterxml.jackson.core | jackson-annotations
>  3860911 | org.slf4j                  | jcl-over-slf4j
>  3410877 | org.springframework        | spring-core
>  3062759 | org.springframework        | spring-beans
>  2989047 | classworlds                | classworlds
> 
> However, only junit and the 2 spring modules are missing a pom.properties.
> The assertion that less than half the popular components don't have it
> seems provably incorrect.

It's correct for the 140 projects that I examined, which is all that
I claimed.  Check them for yourself.

The number of projects that constitutes a reasonable sample of the
"popular" projects (by whatever ranking) is a bit of a judgement call,
but twenty seems very small to me.  Every project in my list of 140 is
well known, so I think it's a more representative sample.

What do you see if you examine the top 140 projects according to
whatever ranking you use for Central?

>                           All the popular stuff is in Maven Central and
> again, 94% is a huge number, saying it doesn't cover much is just
> inaccurate.

Nearly everything in Central is not popular.  That 94% of all projects
have a given property does not imply that 94% of the popular projects
have that property.

- Mark