Desktop is already a smaller market compared before. And the competition has become toucher because of several toolkits out there - Electron, Flutter, Compose for Desktop, etc. Hence, the need for more open and community-driven JavaFX project.
On Wed, Feb 3, 2021, 12:14 PM Ty Young, <youngty1...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2/2/21 8:16 PM, Nir Lisker wrote: > > > Hi Mike, > > > > First of all, I would have you consider revisiting your medical > observation > > on the state of JavaFX. If you've read the almost-weekly recurrent > threads > > of "should I use Swing or JavaFX" in r/Java, you'd realize that reports > of > > JavaFX's death are greatly exaggerated. But yes, it is very understaffed. > > Other than that, there is a discussion list, > > openjfx-disc...@openjdk.java.net, where you can bring up general > community > > and social media related topics and continue that branch of the > discussion > > there. > > > > 1. I also advocated for having JBS more open in the past. I was told that > > Oracle tried opening JBS for everyone, but it was a big mess. I > > remember Alan Bateman saying a few years ago in an Ask The Architect > > session, when he was asked about this, that more than half of the bugs > > submitted are about OpenGL in Minecraft. These are the things you don't > see > > from the outside. > > > I'm guessing some of those are the OpenGL segfault crash on exit that > affects (nearly?) *every* OpenGL based Java application for the last few > years, including JavaFX and Minecraft, on Nvidia hardware. I have to > clear out my build directory often because of it. > > > > As for the OCA, it is a license requirement for all of OpenJDK. The > > developers here have nothing to do with it. I suspect you will have to > take > > it up with the legal department of Oracle. Good luck :) > > > > OCA is more of a symptom of a larger problem IMO: gate keeping. > > > A long time ago I suggested a 1-liner change to JavaFX's build script > that would simply place the source zip generated with the JavaFX source > build *outside* the lib folder. Generating this zip inside the lib > folder caused runtime problems with Ant and Netbeans whenever you > designated the entire folder as a lib directory in a project and it > didn't make sense anyway. It was rejected, IIRC, because of Oracle's or > Gluon's server configuration issues with the change. There were no > issues doing a local build that I'm aware of when I tested the change > locally. > > > More recently, Oracle decided to break Swing applications that use the > GTK L&F on Arch Linux based distros in JDK 16, was notified of the issue > multiple times by multiple people, and AFAIK refused to revert the > changes simply because Arch Linux isn't a "supported" distro. AFAIK, > it's still not possible to even launch Netbeans on Arch Linux without > overriding the L&F. > > > Even more recently, I suggested (and was willing to actually do) what I > thought to be reasonable API changes to Project Panama, which I use in > my JavaFX application, were rejected because it was decided a year ago > behind closed doors discussions that the direction of that API part was > already decided. Not only that, but the ability to even have a public > discussion was basically shut down. > > > Someone has to be that person to make the decisions in the end, but > often times it feels like free outsourcing rather than contributing. One > moment it's "You should contribute!" and the next it's "No, I didn't > mean contribute *that* way!". > > > Anyway, this is a much larger issue that goes beyond JavaFX and I don't > want to derail, I'm just pointing out that not only when someone > suggests reasonable changes and fixes or, better yet(by far!), is > willing to make those changes, they are denied the ability to do so > because of reasons that person could not possibly be aware of. > >
