Hi
Some observations:
This is the mentioned e-mail:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/openjfx-dev/2018-September/022497.html
The lib folder contains a src.zip file, both in JDK 13.0.1 and in JavaFX
SDK 13.0.1, so this is consistent.
For NetBeans and IntelliJ IDEA (I didn't check Eclipse):
- neither supports jmod files in libraries (see [1])
- both support selecting individual jar files, after which things work
as expected
- neither constructs an optimal modulepath, even if the application is
modular
So I believe that this is mostly just a documentation issue: rather than
saying "add the lib folder of the SDK" it should say "add all jar files
in the lib folder of the SDK". Additionally, IDEs should be improved to
support jmod files in libraries, and to construct optimal modulepaths
for modular applications.
Kind regards,
Anthony
[1] https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-171448
On 28/12/2019 20:11, Ty Young wrote:
On 12/28/19 4:53 AM, Johan Vos wrote:
Hi Ty,
Since I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, I have a
few questions:
1. "... push changes to the repo..."? -> It would help giving a bit
context instead of talking about "the repo". Since this is the
openjfx-dev list, chances are high you're talking about the JavaFX
repository at https://github.com/openjdk/jfx. In that case, please
read the README and CONTRIBUTING files there for advice on how to
propose/make changes (note that this will probably take longer than 1
minute, as we have strong quality checks in place). If you talk about
a different "repo", please follow the explicit or implicit rules on
that repo(sitory). For example, if you talk about
https://github.com/openjfx/openjfx-docs , please create an issue and
file a PR, and work with the community to get it accepted. (note that
in this case, this should not be discussed on the openjfx-dev list
(note the *dev*)).
This is not an issue of documentation. IDEs can and do provide the
ability to designate an entire folder as a location of project
libraries. You can specify a directory manually via command line in
which contains Java 9 modules. To continue to entertain the idea that
this is an issue of documentation is simply crazy. It's an easily
fixable technical error.
2. You refer to informal or formal talks you had, but it is totally
unclear to me who you talked to about what. Frankly, we spent lots of
time moving all code and as much as possible the documentation to
github, so we can easily track discussions. (for JavaFX bugs, we use
JBS, so that can be discussed there) If someone said "it’s the way
we’ve always done it”" please refer to the issue where your request
has been made and subsequently rejected, so I can have a look at the
context,
It was an email a very long time ago on this list. Too lazy to dig it
up, but I'm pretty sure it was from Kevin Rushforth. Again, very long
time ago at this point.
3. Can you write a few words about what the word "Community" means to
you? Many people in the JavaFX Ecosystem spent tons of spare time in
making the JavaFX "Community" a friendly place. I'm interested in
your opinion about that word. To give a few options, does it mean
A: I insult people and companies, use words like "smoking shrooms"
and "stubborn" and I expect everything I think about to be fixed
magically (since I suppose the volunteers have no life apart from
doing what I want them to do)
"community" is a funny word to describe JavaFX given it is 100% owned
by Oracle and which no one(AFAIK) can contribute to without signing
away their rights to their own code.
If this was a feature request I'd understand this nonsense but that's
not at all what this is. This is a self created, self perpetuated, and
needlessly self harming *technical* error defended using the worst
possible defense against very real issues(the creation of this thread
is proof). Source files(or zips containing such) are not libraries(AKA
"libs") and it causes IDE issues(among other things). The fix is
*really* simple.
and the whole (in essence) "everyone who works on JavaFX is a someone
doing it in their free time is BS. Oracle developers are payed to work
on JavaFX and are the ones who originally made JavaFX(AFAIK) and
(presumably) the Gradle script. If someone with basically no knowledge
of Gradle such as myself can scan through a file or use ctrl + f and
read variable names then I'd hope someone with actual experience could
do better. Maybe I'm wrong and am the one in actuality that is smoking
shrooms.
B: I friendly discuss issues and opportunities with fellow community
members, where I respect other opinions, keep discussions polite and
technical.
That's funny because I seem to remember during a JDK(or maybe it was
exclusively JavaFX?) event that a presenter made a rather rude joke
about my multi-threading issue I brought up on this list a long time
ago. I don't remember specifically who made the joke but I do know as
someone who watches said events on YouTube that those events are very
incestuous. I guess because it was the other way around that it was OK
though.
TL;DR: People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
C: somewhere between A and B?
- Johan
On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 12:11 AM Ty Young <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 12/27/19 4:40 PM, John-Val Rose wrote:
> Ty,
>
> If it’s so easy to fix then why don’t you just fix it?
I don't exactly have the ability to directly push changes to the
repo...
>
> John-Val
>
>> On 28 Dec 2019, at 09:14, Ty Young <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 12/27/19 4:19 AM, Johan Vos wrote:
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> What tutorial are you talking about? If you refer to
https://openjfx.io,
>>> that is a community-initiative, developed at
>>> https://github.com/openjfx/openjfx-docs .
>>> So if you have issues and PR's, that is the place to submit
and discuss
>>> with the other contributors to that site.
>>
>> Only the Netbeans section has a warning telling you to delete
src.zip. Neither Intellij nor Eclipse do.
>>
>>
>> A user shouldn't have to do that anyway though! This could be
easily fixed. Literally all you need to do is in this section:
>>
>>
>> // Zip module sources for standalone SDK
>> //
>> // NOTE: the input is taken from the
modular-sdk/modules_src dir
>> // so that we don't have to duplicate the logic and create
another
>> // temporary directory. This is somewhat inelegant, since
the bundled sdk
>> // and the standalone sdk should be independent of one
another, but seems
>> // better than the alternatives.
>> def zipSourceFilesTask =
project.task("zipSourceFilesStandalone$t.capital", type: Zip,
dependsOn: buildModulesTask) {
>> destinationDir = file("${standaloneLibDir}")
>> archiveName = standaloneSrcZipName
>> includeEmptyDirs = false
>> from modulesSrcDir
>> include "**/*.java"
>> }
>>
>>
>> change:
