OK, if that statement holds true it is not too unlikely it will be the death of our plans to migrate to JFX (which I am trying to convince my partners of). I am aware that using private APIs is a last resort and we don't do that if we don't have to. Realistically the pace at which JFX (which we think is a great technology btw.) matures, it is currently the only way to handle the risk of running into something that does not work (yet), which has happened to me many times just beginning to dive into migration. Simply stating "it's not a good idea to do this" and hoping it's going to work is ignoring the facts and I will probably not bet my business on JFX without everything we lose, if enforcement of this is mandatory in Java 9. Just looking at a few things in Jira, it is obvious that you are already scheduling rather serious problems to Java 9 and I am not expecting this to change very soon, because Oracle suddenly doubles the dev resources for JFX. Taking away this (admittedly very ugly) way for developers to help themselves at their own risk (in many cases until something is fixed/implemented in the JDK by Oracle, which, of course, takes more time than a hack) is IMHO not a good idea in the current phase of JFX. You will probably lose yet more originally very interested software vendors who will disappointedly move to native technologies because they simply cannot deliver the product they want/have to, although they'd rather use Java (FX). But, of course, it's your decision and legitimate to do it either way. I'm just trying to show you a side here (that I think a number of other ISVs here on the list know), that might need a little lobbying.
On the other hand, I would guess that deactivating the enforcement of this in OpenJDK will probably not be too difficult anyway, so if you decide not to offer to make this configurable one could find a way by building a modified OpenJDK and shipping that but it would be nicer if Oracle would acknowledge that this helps some people at this stage and offer it. After all some of those people are JFX lobbyists out there and there are not many at the moment compared to the competing technologies. It all may be a different situation a few years from now when JFX has matured and seen a few thousand serious commercial applications built on top of it. On Wed, Apr 8, 2015 at 6:25 PM, Joe McGlynn <joe.mcgl...@oracle.com> wrote: > This is unrelated to FX, no Java applications will be able to use private > APIs in JDK 9. There _may_ be a temporary compatibility mode, but clearly > use of them is not something you should plan on regardless of UI technology. >
