Draft JPMS Public Review specification

[mark.reinhold at oracle.com]

2017/3/12 15:54:41 -0700, tim_ellison at uk.ibm.com:
> ...
> 
> I agree that we should drop the proposal addressing #VersionsInModuleNames,
> that module names must end with a Java letter.  Based on practical experience
> there are a number of libraries that have attempted to use a number
> legitimately (i.e. not as a version identifier) and been caught out by this.

Examples, please, other than `commons-lang3` and `fabric8`?

> There are any number of bad practices that could be accomplished within the
> current design, and attempting to spec them out of existence is quite futile.
> This proposal introduces friction to adoption for a very limited gain.

If only a couple of projects are affected by this constraint then perhaps the
gain outweighs the friction.

Otherwise, is there some other way to discourage developers from encoding
version numbers in module names?

- Mark