.. my point is such a project backed by only one company is possibly not
enough. Unless that company is Microsoft, Google, Facebook or even Oracle.
Xamarin and React Native, both cross platform frameworks, are more popular
than JavaFX and are each owned by Microsoft and Facebook, respectively.
My
Mike, can you explain what you mean by a “JavaFX website”?
> On 3 Sep 2018, at 02:59, Mike Hearn wrote:
>
> I believe you're over-thinking this Pedro. A quote from Margaret Thatcher
> springs to mind:
>
> "They are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no
>> such
I believe you're over-thinking this Pedro. A quote from Margaret Thatcher
springs to mind:
"They are casting their problems on society and who is society? There is no
> such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and
> no government can do anything except through people
I'm just an individual, freelancer/consultant, I don't have the resources
to build / test / host JavaFX myself. I've done what I can to contribute
with free open source projects for JavaFX (see:
https://pixelduke.com/projects/ for a list of some, not all of my free open
source JavaFX projects). I
This is one of the reasons I pushed (along with other's) to open a Github
repository. Making it so that the work we do there transfers over to master
easier is something that is on-going.
I implemented the support for Travis CI and Appveyor so that if you open
a pull-request on the openjdk-jfx
I have to say I am very happy with what Gluon has done and continues to
do. It takes a tremendous amount of time and money to manage and grow a
project like JavaFX. I can't thank them enough.
I agree with Kevin that nothing is stopping anyone from contributing.
On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 9:35 AM
There is nothing stopping you or anyone else from producing builds of
OpenJFX. Software doesn't build itself, though, so you'll need to find
the resources to build / test / host JavaFX somewhere. I for one am very
happy that Gluon has stepped up to do this. There has been some
discussion with
Not sure if the term "drop" is correct. But, with what Oracle did, it would
be more beneficial for JavaFX. The development has been more open;
encouraging more contributors.
Julez
On Sat, Sep 1, 2018, 9:55 PM Pedro Duque Vieira, <
pedro.duquevie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, just a site with code
Yes, just a site with code on github would be enough, for example. Without
any publicity or endorsement to any particular company.
Jfxtras does this: http://jfxtras.org/ and the code of the site is on
github repository: https://github.com/JFXtras/jfxtras.github.com
Outside of this, Gluon can
Hi Pedro,
I also agree. JavaFX should be developed outside of any profit organization.
I'm not sure, maybe I'm quick to suggest this: perhaps, a foundation should
be created to foster the development of JavaFX. And anyone (same people
now, amd more) should be encouraged to participate. I'm not
Hello,
Just put it on github and let people fork it however they want.
That would be "open".
Werner,-
PS: I _am_ seriously pissed at Oracle about this shit. I spend the last
years specializing in their newest technology 'which they would never
ever drop' and now they just drop it.
On Sat,
Hi Pedro,
I just happen to agree with you in this issue.
But, out of all the possible new custodians of JavaFX, I have to say that I am
always in awe of what Johan and Gluon have already contributed and accomplished.
So how do we ensue that OpenJFX is truly “open”?
I agree that even though
Hi,
For JavaFX to start being, truly, a community project it is important that
it is perceived as a real community effort. Right now it's starting to look
more like it's changing hands, from being an Oracle project to being a
Gluon project.
I don't have anything against Gluon, I'd say the same
13 matches
Mail list logo
