I totally assumed that, when JavaFX is separated out, it will distributed as an
artifact on Maven central (or similar) so it can be included like a dependency.
Feels like a no brainer?
On 26-3-2018 10:50, Johan Vos wrote:
Hi,
I want to start a discussion on distributing JavaFX as an SDK versus
distributing its modules via the traditional build and distribution
mechanisms.
Personally, I think relying on an SDK is too much a barrier. It requires
users to manually download software from the exact right place, and
"install" it on the exact right target. If a version changes, you have to
manage that manually.
That is how JavaFX was distributed before it was bundled with the JDK, so
it makes sense to provide that option (although me and others will probably
never use that).
Today however, when a developer has a dependency on a library or framework
(including property files and native code), he uses his build tools (e.g.
maven/gradle) to manage the download/install//update of those
libaries/frameworks.
If you rely on Spring, Apache Commons, slf4j,... you don't download those
SDK's but you point to the group-name-version triplet in your pom.xml or
build.gradle file. I don't see why JavaFX would be different here.
When someone is new to JavaFX, or is considering JavaFX, I think chances on
success will be much bigger if that person simply needs to add e.g.
dependencies {
compile: 'javafx:javax.graphics:11.0.0'
}
to his build.gradle and then rely on gradle (or maven) and jcenter/sonatype
to make sure the correct version with all its dependencies are installed
(in a maven/gradle local cache)
- Johan
