On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 14:54:16 GMT, Johan Vos <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> I don't think that would be needed. We currently use the same approach as > maven, and have a "permanent" cache for artifacts. For users, JavaFX comes as an invisible part of an application in 99% of cases. That's different from Maven, which is consciously installed by users either manually or as part of a software development suite. Most users of a JavaFX application did not consent to permanent changes to their system that persist even after they uninstall the application. > There is a difference between the JavaFX libraries and application-specific > components. No, not from the perspective of a user of an application that happens to use JavaFX. The same argument could be made for every third-party library used by an application, and you wouldn't want every one of those to make permanent changes to your system, too. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/654
