Awesome - on the surface it does look like what Oracle were/should-be trying to build with their packaging tools - and it's free!
If you use it a bit, let me know how it goes. If it's any good I'll look at wrappering this in a Maven plugin (looks straight forward). Maybe we can cut Oracle out of this altogether and get some actual progress here. If you can get your JWrappered reportmill app deployed somewhere, I'd be keen to try it out and see what the end user experience is like. Just trying their sample apps now. On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Jeff Martin <j...@reportmill.com> wrote: > Wow - JWrapper really is remarkable. It took me less than 30 minutes to > figure out how to package our ReportMill app for Mac, Windows and Linux. > Worked like magic. It doesn't include JavaFX yet, though, even though the > Mac JRE is 1.7.0u25. > > Jeff > > On Jul 18, 2013, at 4:20 PM, David Ray <cognitionmiss...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > JWrapper (no plug - I don't work for them or own stock) solves all of > this - you have to bundle the jvm but it's small and the installation is > hitch-less… > > > > Oracle should buy them out - seriously! > > > > David > > > > > > On Jul 18, 2013, at 4:09 PM, ozem...@ozemail.com.au wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> The various applet and Web Start deployment options are severly > damaging the entire Java brand. and should be discontinued ASAP. > >> > >> Even before the recent security issues raised their ugly heads there > have been several issues with either launching Java applications from > within a web page or running them as applets and the user experience has > been dismal to say the least. > >> > >> The main reason why Java applets had such a short-lived period of > popularity was because Flash came along. Flash applets started > significantly faster, didn't pop-up any security warnings and almost always > "just worked". The exact opposite was true of applets and, sadly, this has > only gone further downhill lately. > >> > >> For many years the browser vendors have gone out of their way to make > running Java in the browser a very painful experience for the end user. > Now we have the situation where most people assume every Java applet is a > security threat and avoid them like the plague. > >> > >> Anyway, I do not believe Java, JavaFX or any plugin-based technology > has any place in a web browser. This includes Flash and Silverlight. We > have HTML5 for that kind of app. Surely it won't be long until all browser > vendors make it *impossible* for Java to run inside the browser or simply > not support *any* plugins. > >> > >> What's the point of investing any further effort into the Java Plugin? > Yes, I know there are legacy apps and applets out there that need to run > but Oracle should be focused on getting JavaFX into the "modern" platforms > and their associated app stores. Why not issue an End Of LIfe bulletin > that signals the end of the Java Plugin so anyone out there still relying > on Java applets can have time to find an alternative. > >> > >> Let's face it, almost *all* the security vulnerabilities exposed in > recent months only affect Java in the browser. All the effort Oracle > expends on patching these vulnerabilities and tightening up the security > model should be spent on advancing JavaFX on mobiles and tablets. > >> > >> -jct > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: > >> "Daniel Zwolenski" <zon...@gmail.com> > >> > >> To: > >> "David Ray" <cognitionmiss...@gmail.com> > >> Cc: > >> "mike.ehrenb...@barchart.com Ehrenberg" <mike.ehrenb...@barchart.com>, > "openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net" <openjfx-dev@openjdk.java.net>, > "JeremyJongsma" <jer...@barchart.com> > >> Sent: > >> Fri, 19 Jul 2013 06:47:46 +1000 > >> Subject: > >> Re: JavaFX 8 Progress > >> > >> > >> Among general complaints and my own disasters with it, I had this guy > write to me: > >> > >> http://web-conferencing-central.com > >> > >> The failure of webstart is making him lose customers (they literally > are emailing him and telling him it's too hard to install). This is one of > the very few commercial, public apps that use desktop-java and webstart > (I'd be keen to know about any others - I know of none that use jfx?). > >> > >> From what I understand of the work being carried out, I highly doubt > any of the fixes or improvements being worked on are going to help people > like this. > >> > >> I love the idea of web deployment but it's failed and getting worse > with the complexities now added in your attempts to keep it secure. In my > opinion, web deploy should be deprecated or at least placed in minimal > 'bandaid' only fixes and all effort should be put into making native > bundles actually useful and into adding app store support. > >> > >> > >> On 19/07/2013, at 2:10 AM, David Ray <cognitionmiss...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> I don't want to open up the webstart can of worms here, but we have > multiple issues surrounding recognition and validity of signed jars when > using certain VMARGS in combination with OSGi style deployment. We finally > settled on JWrapper due to WebStarts apparent "brittleness" - but as you > say, this is neither here nor there as far as JavaFX is concerned… > >>> > >>> Anyway, thanks for getting back to us on the deployment tools > organization… > >>> > >>> David > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Jul 18, 2013, at 9:22 AM, Joe McGlynn <joe.mcgl...@oracle.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>>> No, the deployment team works on these, not the FX team. It's the > same bits for FX and Swing/AWT when running browser-deployed apps (which > includes applets and web start). Deployment, FX and Swing are all part of > the Java client org. > >>>> > >>>> There are a number of bug fixed being worked in this area, as well as > new requirements around how to deploy a secure applet or web start app. The > deploy code base is currently identical between 7u and JDK 8. If you are > working with deploy technologies you should know this area is rapidly > changing and I'd strongly advise staying on the latest release (currently > 7u40 EA) and following the updates to the docs, especially around best > practices for deployment. > >>>> > >>>> In short, these are: > >>>> > >>>> Buy a code signing certificate from a recognized CA and sign your app > >>>> Use the new "permissions" and "codebase" JAR manifest attributes > >>>> > >>>> I'd recommend avoiding the use of "mixed code" if at all possible as > that results in additional warning prompts to the end user and additional > runtime risks. > >>>> > >>>> I'd also recommend testing your app with the security slider at the > "Very High" level with every update of the JRE. Typically new restrictions > are introduced first at Very High, and then propagated down into High and > ultimately Medium over time. > >>>> > >>>> If there are problems using deployment with FX, of course report the > issue and the team will investigate. I'm aware of one problem that causes > some FX web start apps not to work with the latest release. It's being > investigated right now. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Jul 18, 2013, at 6:40 AM, Daniel Zwolenski <zon...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Sure, but no one other than the JFX team are (or will be) working on > these > >>>>> right? They are effectively desktop technologies and no other team > has any > >>>>> interest in them I'm guessing? > >>>>> > >>>>> I'd assume if they're not on the JFX roadmap, they're not on the Java > >>>>> roadmap? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Artem Ananiev < > artem.anan...@oracle.com>wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 7/18/2013 3:00 AM, David Ray wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Richard, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I don't see any mention of WebStart and JavaFX on the milestone > list - > >>>>>>> are issues surrounding (and suffocating :)) WebStart going to > addressed as > >>>>>>> part of the JDK release 8 instead? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Java Plugin and Java Web Start are not parts of JavaFX (although > JavaFX > >>>>>> provides some APIs for them), they are shared between JDK and > JavaFX and > >>>>>> released as a part of Oracle JDK8 (not included to OpenJDK). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Artem > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> David > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Jul 17, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Richard Bair < > richard.b...@oracle.com> > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi Peter, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Our dates match up with JDK 8: http://openjdk.java.net/** > >>>>>>>> projects/jdk8/milestones< > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8/milestones> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Feature complete was a month ago (but little API tweaks continue > to > >>>>>>>> happen). Things are supposed to be reasonably stable by October > 24 (Zero > >>>>>>>> Bug Bounce > http://openjdk.java.net/**projects/jdk8/milestones#Zero_** > >>>>>>>> Bug_Bounce< > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8/milestones#Zero_Bug_Bounce>) > >>>>>>>> and GA in March. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Richard > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Jul 17, 2013, at 9:52 AM, Peter Penzov <peter.pen...@gmail.com > > > >>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>>> I'm new to JavaFX I'm interested what is the current progress of > >>>>>>>>> development of JavaFX 8. I want to use it for base framework for > my > >>>>>>>>> enterprise application but I have concerns is it stable to be > used? Can > >>>>>>>>> you > >>>>>>>>> give me some information do you plan to add something else > before the > >>>>>>>>> official release? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Best wishes, > >>>>>>>>> Peter > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > >
