I think this feature would be nice to have but I doubt that it is simple
to achieve
because JavaFX may or may not already be included in the JDK against
which you build
and on which your project later runs. There needs to be a strategy how
to handle all
the resulting corner cases.
Am 28.02.18 um 11:27 schrieb Johan Vos:
Hi Michael,
The second question is what I think should be the default.
This is similar to Java EE ^^^^^^^ EE4J ^^^^ Jakarta EE development:
if you want to include (some) EE API's, you include them in
maven/gradle/ant, or your IDE does that for you.
Same, if you want to include JavaFX API's in your project, you declare
that as a dependency in maven/gradle/ant (or your IDE does that for
you) and they will get downloaded from Maven Central or jcenter (if
you don't have them yet).
- Johan
Op wo 28 feb. 2018 om 10:29 schreef Michael Paus <m...@jugs.org
<mailto:m...@jugs.org>>:
Hi Kevin,
thank you for the update. I appreciate this work very much because I
think it is utterly important for JavaFX.
While reading the past messages again I was wondering whether this
will
also address the following
two questions.
1. Will there be a way to determine at program start-up whether JavaFX
is available or not in order to be able
to give a user a clear and helpful error message in case it is not?
2. Might it even be possible to treat JavaFX as just another
dependency
in your Maven (or whatever) project?
For me personally these questions are not so important because I
prefer
the approach of building a native
installer which already contains everything needed, but for other
people
in other usage scenarios these
questions might be important.
--Michael
Am 27.02.18 um 22:21 schrieb Kevin Rushforth:
> One of the big challenges in running JavaFX with OpenJDK builds is
> that developers need to build OpenJDK locally themselves and include
> the JavaFX bits produced by a locally-built OpenJFX build.
>
> In an earlier email with the subject "javafx might not be present"
> [1], I mentioned our intention to make it easier for OpenJFX to be
> built, tested, and run with OpenJDK builds that don't already
contain
> javafx.* modules. This will pave the way to allow a set of pre-built
> javafx modules to be distributed that will run on top of a pre-built
> OpenJDK.
>
> By way of update, this work is underway and can be tracked via the
> following two JBS issues:
>
> 1. Removing internal dependencies:
>
> JDK-8195798 [2] : Address dependencies in javafx.* modules on
internal
> APIs of core modules
>
> The above is an umbrella task that points to several linked blocking
> bugs. All of these bugs are in progress and a few are already done
> (e.g., removing jdk.internal.Unsafe from Marlin).
>
>
> 2. Enabling the building, testing, and distribution as a set of
> separate modules
>
> JDK-8198329 [3] : Support FX build / test using JDK that doesn't
> include javafx.* modules
>
> This one depends on the first two, but can be started in
parallel, so
> I plan to start on it in the next few days.
>
>
> Let me know if you have any questions on this.
>
> -- Kevin
>
> [1]
>
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/openjfx-dev/2018-February/021447.html
>
> [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8195798
>
> [3] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198329
>
