Stephen Colebourne

The PR is indeed backwards incompatible. My suggestion would be to add two new classes with the fixed code (different class names), and deprecated the old classes. That way there...

Thanks @kinow , this seems like the right solution. Now the module-info can just use `require static` to avoid creating a full dependency on the awkward three classes and users...

@michaelsavich , this PR does not create a full dependency on `java.desktop`. The dependency is expressed as `requires static`, which means that it will not be pulled in by default....

`mvn install` works fine on each JDK version AFAICT. `mvn site` still breaks on cobertura on Java 9 and I'm not sure I can work around it without removing it...

@namannigam You need to check it out and run `mvn clean install site` on Java 9.

Adding `module-info` causes some older/Android projects to fail as they can't handle the class format. So, projects are left with the choice of moving forwards or breaking these older/Android projects....

Its not just compiling, there are issues at runtime still AFAIK, especially with Java EE and older bytecode libraries.

There is a lot of complexity in commons-parent and commons generally. Getting a build to work for Joda was hard enough, and there I am willing to insist on releases...

I've seen error reports from using multi-version jar files as well as from just placing the `module-info.class` in the root. It is perfectly possible to create a fully modularized commons-lang...

Thanks for the reply. I spent two hours this morning trying to setup the environment, but got nowhere. Eclipse Oomph is a nice idea, but I've never actually got it...