https://blog.plan99.net/is-jigsaw-good-or-is-it-wack-ec634d3...
There are many large applications that can benefit from jigsaw; this is sad.
What is it you need from Jigsaw that OSGI doesn't already provide?
Personally I'm ambivalent about Jigsaw. My main hope is that they don't f%!# up and create something that breaks existing OSGI implementations. As long as I can just ignore the new stuff and keep using my existing OSGI bundles - until such a time as I'm ready to embrace the Jigsaw stuff - then I'm not going to worry about this too much. But if they break OSGI with Java 9, I'm going to be incredibly pissed.
Simplicity, native language integration and a sane path for a Java linker.
No, they won't. Eclipse runs fine on Java 9 and AFAIK there's even limited interoperability.
There are other issues with many of the tools.
Do you mean that when you compile with javac you see non-exported packages?
> integration with maven was a pain
Were you using Tycho? Were you running in "manifest first" mode and were the issues related to resolving bundles?
> There are other issues with many of the tools.
Can you be more specific?
In the end after successfully using OSGi for distribution, and guaranteeing module separation in a 250kloc project I led, I've decided that separate api and impl modules managed by maven are good enough, with lints to guard against Class.forName() shananegans.
My point is: I personally worked really hard to make OSGi work, it was not fun, I'm sure I was doing something out of the norm, and I'm not a Java novice. So having something baked into the language and jdk would make this experience better. (I am not advocating for Jigsaw over OSGi, btw, just native language and tool support for a modularity).
For a single application / project that is most often the case in my experience.
Do you mean readability?