...and please don’t forget the packager services! Perhaps it could be made available as a maven module?
/Lennart Börjeson Electrogramma ab iPhono meo missum est > 7 aug. 2018 kl. 19:54 skrev Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com>: > > We're still aiming for that, although it might be a bit after JDK 11 ships. > > -- Kevin > > >> On 8/7/2018 10:02 AM, Michael Paus wrote: >> I don't know whether the following statement is still valid, but if it is, >> then it may not be worth the effort to resurrect the old javapackager >> if at least an EA build of the new one is so close. >> >>> On 6/27/2018 3:30 PM, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >>> /We're aiming to get this into JDK 12 early enough so that an EA build >>> />/would be available around the time JDK 11 ships. That will allow you >>> />/to take a jlinked image with JDK 11 and package it up using (the EA) >>> />/jpackager./ >> >> Michael >> >>> Am 07.08.18 um 18:49 schrieb Kevin Rushforth: >>> Someone could certainly do that. >>> >>> We think there is enough interest in having a standard tool that it is >>> worth spending effort on a replacement tool that will be part of standard >>> JDK builds, including OpenJDK builds that have never had javapackager. In >>> the mean time, if a standalone build of javapackager works for you, then >>> that's great. >>> >>> -- Kevin >>> >>> >>>> On 8/7/2018 9:16 AM, jo...@msli.com wrote: >>>> The motivation for a new packager states a need for a a packager, but >>>> not why the javapackager can't continue. >>>> >>>> With all the work that went into javapackager, why can't it simple be >>>> released for continued development outside Oracle, if they don't want to >>>> maintain it. >>>> >>>> The javapackager has worked well for a few years, so why reinvent a >>>> packager with fewer features, rather than expand features, and clear bugs? >>>> >>>>> On 08/07/2018 05:03 AM, Lennart Börjeson wrote: >>>>> Well, while I can surely use the packager from JDK 10 and bundle my >>>>> application with 11, I'd still miss out on the packager service, i.e. the >>>>> application would not be able to use the UserJvmOptions. >>>>> >>>>> It seems to me the packager service has been completely forgotten? >>>>> JDK-8200758 does not mention it at all. >>>>> >>>>> /Lennart >>>>> >>>>>> 7 aug. 2018 kl. 13:45 skrev Nir Lisker <nlis...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Lennart, >>>>>> >>>>>> You should be able to use the packager from JDK 10, see >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203379 >>>>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203379>. >>>>>> >>>>>> There is a draft for a replacement, see >>>>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200758 >>>>>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200758>. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Nir >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 12:28 PM, Lennart Börjeson <lenbo...@gmail.com >>>>>> <mailto:lenbo...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>> I'm migrating to JDK 11 and OpenJFX 11, and would like to continue using >>>>>> the packager and the associated packager service (i.e. the >>>>>> UserJvmOptions). >>>>>> >>>>>> AFAIK, those are gone from the available binary builds, but still there >>>>>> in the code. Is there a way to use them without resorting to build >>>>>> openjfx myself? If not, is there some alternative to the UserJvmOptions? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> (I'm currently working around my problems by building both openjfx and >>>>>> the JDK, and bundling openjfx with the JDK, just like in the good old >>>>>> days...) >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> /Lennart Börjeson >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>> >> >
