Re: future content of OpenJFX

OK, after Wolfgang’s comments, I will unleash my rant again in the “appropriate” thread as I feel that the lack of JavaFX adoption is very much due to the nature of the toolkit itself: Well, not only do I think that a docking framework is *that* complex, I see it as an essential part of any

Re: More community participation in JavaFX

This has now veered off topic for this thread. It would be a fine topic for the "future content of OpenJFX" thread. -- Kevin John-Val Rose wrote: Well, not only do I think that a docking framework is *that* complex, I see it as an essential part of any serious graphics toolkit. In

Re: future content of OpenJFX

As a vendor of third party controls it's finally time for a feedback. We create look and feels and controls mainly for Swing/JavaFX desktop business applications. For us the most important things are: * Bugfixing - and we've already reported a lot over the past years * Rock solid base controls

Re: future content of OpenJFX

It's off-topic but very relevant and indeed representative for many projects. Remember heartbleed? Almost the whole IT industry depends on OpenSSL yet didn't fund it. http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/18/technology/security/heartbleed-volunteers/ It it not easy to get funding for fundamental core

Re: future content of OpenJFX

Johan, I actually enjoy reading your “business talk”. It’s very enlightening. I had no idea that the FX team was such a small band of gypsies. In fact I’m shocked that such a large industry can be powered by such a small team and not realize it themselves. But how could they know?

Re: More community participation in JavaFX

I have coded such a framework in one of my open source projects. I can extract this code and setup a github project for it if people are interested. Hervé Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 7, 2018, at 10:52, John-Val Rose wrote: > > > > Well, not only do I think that a

Re: More community participation in JavaFX

Well, not only do I think that a docking framework is *that* complex, I see it as an essential part of any serious graphics toolkit. In general, I don’t understand all the limitations that people keep imposing on JavaFX as if we have to “settle” for what is basically a 2nd class citizen

Re: More community participation in JavaFX

Well, I believe he was hinting at that a docking framework is considered more complex, there was no negative sentiment in that. Although I do not think a docking framework is that complex, but maybe I'm wrong. And yes, ALMOST everyone is at ControlFX ;-) > Jonathan - why do you *cough* at

Re: More community participation in JavaFX

Hi folks, Please respect the 2 threads with different scopes: - this one on how to simplify external contributions (infrastructure, review policies...) - the other one on javafx features... Please stay in the scope & being constructive... I personally improved the prism shape rasterizer