The question is: Is JavaFX for mobile a business for Oracle to make big money? I suppose Oracle don’t believe in it. They believe in servers, cloud and the „Internet of Things“ - that’s why they invest in Rasp.PI, Freescale, etc.
btw: With „Oracle“ I mean „the management of Oracle“, not the guys of Richards team. For me: RoboVM & OpenJDK is the right direction. Am 09.11.2013 um 19:15 schrieb Tom Eugelink <t...@tbee.org>: > > Oracle has a strict do-not-communicate-what-is-not-certain policy and I > actually commend them for it. Better to not communicate than make promises > you can't keep (I'm seeing the effect on that in many of the projects I'm > asked to assist). I think the urgency of mobile platforms is clear to Oracle, > given the recent focus on JavaME and the internet-of-things. Patience is a > virtue. > > My 2 cents, > > Tom > > > On 2013-11-9 18:21, Pedro Duque Vieira wrote: >> Sure we should listen to Richard. He is doing a great job as well as his >> team. >> I don't think however that enough is being communicated.. >> >> I don't think those legal boundaries are being layed out explicitly. >> What are those legal boundaries? >> Will RoboVM not be subject to those legal issues? >> What's the difference between us creating a project and trying to integrate >> it into openjdk and Oracle doing it? >> Once we create a project and try to integrate it into OpenJDK what will >> happen? Can javafx team members contribute to it (apparently yes)? Will >> Oracle be helping out and telling us what's the best route to follow? >> >> Once we get RoboVM correctly running javafx apps on iOS and Android what >> will still be left out to do? Are things like comboboxes poping up scroll >> wheels already in place? What about app notifications? What about saving >> app configurations to the local platform db? etc, etc? >> I think there is a lot of stuff to discuss. Also I think Oracle should be >> telling us what have they accomplished so far, what exactly they are >> working on (they are indeed actively working on this) for porting javafx to >> iOS and Android... probably something that an email can't cover perfectly.. >> >> Regards, >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Rick Walker <thoughtslin...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> There is more to this issue than simply JavaFX, iOS and Android. There >>> is a bigger picture here that involves the complex relationships >>> between Oracle, Apple and Google. >>> >>> I think it is fair to say that we all have enormous respect for >>> Richard Bair and his team. It seems to me we should listen to Richard. >>> If I understand his postings correctly, he is saying that we, the >>> community, should "create a new OpenJDK project" which, if it "used >>> the OpenJDK class libraries" would let his team "put support directly >>> into the OpenJFX build system for building FX and running FX apps ... >>> directly on RoboVM". >>> >>> It seems to me that the message here is that Oracle is totally willing >>> and able to support RoboVM as an OpenJDK project. Niklas - are you up >>> for it? The optics here are important. The project must be created by >>> the community (NOT BY ORACLE). >>> >>> from Richard's post of October 22: >>> >>> Personally I'm interested in RoboVM on Android, so that there is a >>> single VM across both iOS and Android. Also if RoboVM supported the >>> OpenJDK class libraries, it would make this so much simpler for us and >>> provide a consistent story. For example, the OpenJFX project is an >>> OpenJDK project and we really can't be officially promoting a VM that >>> doesn't implement the Java standard. It puts us in a very awkward >>> position. If RoboVM used the OpenJDK class libraries instead of the >>> Android class libraries, not only could I push it at conferences like >>> JavaOne, but I could also put support directly into the OpenJFX build >>> system for building FX and running FX apps (like Hello*, Modena, >>> Ensemble, etc) directly on RoboVM without developers having to setup >>> anything special. This would be huge for making it easy for people to >>> contribute iOS fixes to OpenJFX. But I can't do that if RoboVM doesn't >>> actually implement "Java". >>> >>> and, from November 8: >>> >>> Totally, I think the normal process for this is to create a new >>> OpenJDK project, is it not? Can you take a look at the OpenJDK bylaws >>> and report back on the process? I think it would be awesome to do a >>> port. Note that there are a few OpenJDK ports already which have ARM >>> support, you might want to look there as a starting point? >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Pedro Duque Vieira >>> <pedro.duquevie...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I'm sure the javafx team is doing a great job. My intention was not to >>> put >>>> that in question but to try to contribute further to this discussion. >>>> >>>> Yes indeed oracle javafx team has fewer resources than what should be >>>> preferred. We need to harvest the power of the community in the best way >>> we >>>> can to further expand the this "resources". >>>> >>>> In that sense I think the best to do is to get better organized at doing >>>> so. >>>> Instead of a man for himself kind of effort we should have a kind of >>>> corporate like structure with the intricacies of being a group of >>>> volunteers... >>>> On Nov 9, 2013 1:21 PM, "Felix Bembrick" <felix.bembr...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>> What we do know is that Oracle are working on "something" and that >>> RoboVM >>>>> is already out there. We also know that RoboVM has serious limitations >>>>> such as being based on the Android class library, not supporting JDK 8 >>> or >>>>> OpenJDK or invokedynamic etc. so is not really a viable solution at this >>>>> stage. This is not to say that the work of Niklas is not first-class >>> as it >>>>> clearly is an awesome technology even in its current form. >>>>> >>>>> I think the key factor we need to consider here is that RoboVM is >>>>> essentially a one person project and even the JavaFX team at Oracle >>> itself >>>>> is not that large. Although it's difficult to gauge exactly how many >>> are >>>>> on the team, I would say from the various names that pop-up on the >>> OpenJFK >>>>> list and in private conversations we are possibly looking at a dozen or >>>>> less active staff and possibly a total head count of developers in >>> single >>>>> figures. >>>>> >>>>> Clearly then, with such a small pool of talent, it is not practical to >>>>> dilute the effort over more than one project. In an ideal world where >>> we >>>>> had two or more projects backed by large corporations with infinite >>>>> resources then the more competition would be helpful for long term >>>>> viability and quality. But our world is hardly ideal and it makes >>> sense to >>>>> have everyone on the same page. >>>>> >>>>> To this end I tend to agree with Pedro DV in that we need Oracle to come >>>>> clean and "open up" the porting of JavaFX to iOS, Android and any other >>>>> potential OS. I am not going to comment on whether Oracle are doing a >>>>> good/bad job as I am sure there are many more factors and issues that we >>>>> are not privy to that prevents them from doing exactly what we would >>> like >>>>> them to do. They are not out to derail JavaFX and in fact are very much >>>>> behind it being viable on mobiles and tablets. >>>>> >>>>> I know Richard Bair and I have to say that he is one of the most >>>>> passionate developers and believers in Java and JavaFX there is so I am >>>>> sure he is keener than anyone for it to succeed on all platforms. >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps we have to approach Oracle with positivity and a willingness to >>>>> help and hope that they are in a position (technically/legally/etc.) to >>>>> open things up and invite us in. I am absolutely convinced that JavaFX >>> on >>>>> iOS and Android will never be a success if we don't all work together >>> which >>>>> means pooling our resources and code and contributing to an >>> Oracle-driven >>>>> project. >>>>> >>>>> Felix >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 9 November 2013 23:06, Pedro Duque Vieira < >>> pedro.duquevie...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Pardon me for saying this but I think Oracle is really handling this >>> issue >>>>>> very badly. I think very poor communication strategy is the real issue >>> and >>>>>> source of much frustration from the community. >>>>>> >>>>>> I can see that Oracle is indeed working and assigning programming >>> hours to >>>>>> bringing JavaFX to iOS and Android but there is very little >>> communication >>>>>> going on about Oracle progress on this.. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think Oracle should tell us more about their work with javafx on iOS >>> and >>>>>> Android. Oracle should create an article or wiki or whatever about >>> their >>>>>> progress on this: >>>>>> 1 - That site/article/whatever should detail what's the current state, >>>>>> what's missing, what's the roadmap.. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2 - Oracle should tell us how can the community help with the current >>>>>> effort. Creating a list of tasks that could be accomplished by a >>> community >>>>>> member would be very helpful! That would assure that we are not working >>>>>> all >>>>>> on the same thing and thus wasting time. Each community member could >>> than >>>>>> pick up a task and say he/she is working on it and provide pointers to >>>>>> their project and current work so anyone can chime in and help. >>>>>> I think tasks that can be handled by the community should preferably be >>>>>> tasks that should not be too big in scope/development hours - community >>>>>> members usually do this on their spare time for a couple of hours. >>>>>> Currently the only tasks we have are: >>>>>> - Develop iOS port or iOS jvm >>>>>> - Develop Android port or Android jvm >>>>>> This is too big for any community member to pick up. Too big in scope >>> and >>>>>> too much to wrap your mind on. >>>>>> >>>>>> 3 - Oracle should provide an estimated time/effort for each task and >>> for >>>>>> each project. Also an indication of the task importance level would be >>>>>> very >>>>>> helpful. Preferably tasks with a very high importance level should be >>>>>> handled by javafx team members. >>>>>> >>>>>> 4 - Oracle should be the steward of this effort. I think this point is >>>>>> very >>>>>> important for the following reasons: >>>>>> 4.1 - Oracle has more know-how on this than any community member can >>>>>> possible have. So it does not make sense for community members which >>> are >>>>>> less prepared to accomplish this to be the stewards of such effort. It >>>>>> would be like asking a sailor to command a ship and have the captain >>> mop >>>>>> the floors of the deck. >>>>>> 4.2 - By having Oracle as the steward, businesses will be more >>> inclined >>>>>> in betting on developing projects for iOS/Android/Windows phone. This >>> is a >>>>>> credibility issue. >>>>>> 4.3 - By having Oracle as the steward community members are more >>>>>> inclined >>>>>> to help and contribute than say contributing to RoboVM. No offense >>>>>> intended >>>>>> here, I think RoboVM is a great effort and probably the best thing to >>>>>> happen on the javafx space since its start. >>>>>> >>>>>> My 2 cents, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Pedro Duque Vieira >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Richard P. Walker >>> thoughtslin...@gmail.com >>> >>> This email is intended only for the use of the individual(s) to whom >>> it is addressed and may be privileged and confidential. Unauthorised >>> use or disclosure is prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, >>> please advise immediately and delete the original message. This >>> message may have been altered without your or our knowledge and the >>> sender does not accept any liability for any errors or omissions in >>> the message. >>> >>> Ce courriel est confidentiel et protégé. L'expéditeur ne renonce pas >>> aux droits et obligations qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, >>> utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des renseignements qu'il >>> contient par une personne autre que le (les) destinataire(s) >>> désigné(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courriel par erreur, >>> veuillez m'en aviser immédiatement, par retour de courriel ou par un >>> autre moyen. >>> >> >> > >
