I try to use maven-shade-plugin
for a modular jar:
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-shade-plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.1.1</version>
<executions>
<execution>
<phase>package</phase>
<goals>
<goal>shade</goal>
</goals>
</execution>
</executions>
<configuration>
<minimizeJar>true</minimizeJar>
<artifactSet>
<includes>
<include>javax.xml.bind:jaxb-api</include>
<include>com.sun.xml.bind:jaxb-impl</include>
</includes>
</artifactSet>
<relocations>
<relocation>
<pattern>javax.xml.bind</pattern>
<shadedPattern>org.update4j.javax.xml.bind</shadedPattern>
</relocation>
<relocation>
<pattern>com.sun.xml.bind</pattern>
<shadedPattern>org.update4j.com.sun.xml.bind</shadedPattern>
</relocation>
</relocations>
</configuration>
</plugin>
But Maven will remove my module-info.class
from the shaded jar, with a warning:
[WARNING] Discovered module-info.class. Shading will break its strong encapsulation.
How can I configure it to leave it?
EDIT: the warning actually happens when it removes the shaded jar's module descriptor, not my own.
Because of module-info's in the JPMS world dictate the exposure of a module, shading items in may cause that nasty "Package is read from two different modules" error.
I've solved it the following way
<plugin>
<groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId>
<artifactId>maven-shade-plugin</artifactId>
<configuration>
<artifactSet>
<excludes>
<exclude>module-info.java</exclude>
</excludes>
</artifactSet>
</configuration>
<executions>
<execution>
<phase>package</phase>
<goals>
<goal>shade</goal>
</goals>
</execution>
</executions>
</plugin>
<plugin>
<groupId>org.moditect</groupId>
<artifactId>moditect-maven-plugin</artifactId>
<executions>
<execution>
<id>add-module-infos</id>
<phase>package</phase>
<goals>
<goal>add-module-info</goal>
</goals>
<configuration>
<overwriteExistingFiles>true</overwriteExistingFiles>
<module>
<moduleInfoFile>
src/main/java/module-info.java
</moduleInfoFile>
</module>
</configuration>
</execution>
</executions>
</plugin>
This is a really annoying thing, and from everything I've read they have no intention of removing it or adding a flag to bypass it.