I guess I don't quite understand the "packaging and distribution" process. If the packaging and distribution runs gradlew instead of gradle, what does it matter if the project was changed to use a different version? There will effectively be no dependencies that aren't resolved by the gradlew script (which is checked in with the source code) at build time - including the dependency on gradle itself. Are the machines that this would run on not able to access the internet?
Scott On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Mario Torre <neugens.limasoftw...@gmail.com > wrote: > Hi Scott, > > The issue me and Keving were discussing is not much about being able to > use the correct version of Gradle for JavaFX developers, but having such > version a moving target for packaging. If you're building locally, there's > no real problem, but for packaging and distribution in a Linux distro like > Fedora or Ubuntu or SuSe having dependencies that keep changing is very > problematic. > > Of course, upstream should rarely care about those problems unless they > want to be nice for downstream users :) > > I hope this explain a bit more why my concerns regarding this topic. > > Cheers, > Mario > > > > 2013/11/20 Scott Palmer <swpal...@gmail.com> > >> Consider using the gradle wrapper. That should eliminate issues with >> Linux distributions not having the right version of Gradle or any devs >> needing to worry about being on the "official" version. Those wanting to >> test with more recent version will still be able to do so. >> http://www.gradle.org/docs/current/userguide/gradle_wrapper.html >> >> Scott >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Rushforth < >> kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Mario, >>> >>> I am usually reluctant to have build tools changes in an update release, >>> too, so we will certainly take your concern very seriously. >>> >>> As for JavaFX 8 entering maintenance mode, we expect to do most of our >>> work over the next few months in 8u20 (rather than 9), since we are >>> deferring a lot of bugs out of 8. Any new features will be done in 9, but >>> probably not until after 8u20 is in very good shape. >>> >>> >>> -- Kevin >>> >>> >>> Mario Torre wrote: >>> >>>> 2013/11/20 Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com <mailto: >>>> kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We might do an upgrade during some JDK 8u release (e.g., 8u20 or >>>> 8u40), but there would need to be a good reason to do so. >>>> >>>> >>>> Hmmm, I really hope this won't be done, it would likely prevent to >>>> release newer JavaFX (meaning more work to backport fixes). >>>> >>>> Will JavaFX 8 enter maintainance mode? I was of the idea that once >>>> OpenJFX8 is released for JDK8 then all the development would go into *JFX9 >>>> for *JDK9 (with only bug fixing and perhaps stabilisation fixes), no? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Mario >>>> -- >>>> pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF >>>> Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF >>>> >>>> IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org <http://www.icedrobot.org> >>>> >>>> Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ >>>> Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org >>>> OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ >>>> >>>> Please, support open standards: >>>> http://endsoftpatents.org/ >>>> >>> >> > > > -- > pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF > Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF > > IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org > Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ > Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org > OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ > > Please, support open standards: > http://endsoftpatents.org/ >
