On Mon, 28 Oct 2024 19:49:39 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <k...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Somewhat tangential question: should we start placing JEPs in >> `/doc-files/jeps` ? >> >> The use of private repos is ok at the initial stages of discussion, but at >> some point we are risking the bit rot: private repos can be removed but the >> mailing list posts remain... > >> I like that, it clearly explains what to do. thank you! > > I do, too. When I read the discussion up to the point Michael proposed this, > my thought was that the only way to solve it is with a parameter like this. > >> Somewhat tangential question: should we start placing JEPs in >> /doc-files/jeps ? > > There was a thread a while ago about this. Let's restart that thread rather > than discussing it in any particular PR. If this flag is suddenly so important, then why doesn't `requestFocus` have it? I feel that we've found an internal inconsistency, and that the solution is to then drop this on the user to ensure correctness (the wording "callers must specify" definitely alludes to this). It's like asking users to pass along some important flag, and if they get it wrong the system breaks. I think the request focus call should take the most sensible value for focusVisible on programmatic changes, and that FX should not be using this API itself. Now we're just exposing focusVisible in a round-about way (as a boolean flag of some other call) to make it user controllable -- then why not just make it writable? If I don't like the calculated default (or perhaps always `true`), then I can call `Node#setFocusVisible(false)` after the request focus call. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1604#discussion_r1819854040
