JavaFX 26 is now in Rampdown Phase One (RDP1) [1]. We have forked a new
jfx26 branch [2] for stabilizing the JavaFX 26 release.
Here is the short summary of what this means:
- The master branch of the jfx repo is available for integrating bug
fixes or enhancements for jfx27. Almost all fixes will be integrated to
master for 27, even those intended to be fixed in 26.
- The jfx26 branch of the jfx repo is now open for integrating fixes for
jfx26 that meet the RDP1 criteria as outlined below. As with the
previous release, in this release we will integrate almost all
stabilization changes via backports from the master branch [3].
* Almost all fixes intended for the jfx26 stabilization branch will
also be applicable to the master branch. Integrate such a change into
the master branch first. Then, after you have obtained any required
approvals, backport it to the stabilization branch using the Skara
`/backport` command or, if necessary, by manually opening a backport PR
with the title `Backport $HASH`, where `$HASH` is the original commit
hash. (The JDK Developers’ Guide contains more information on working
with backports [4].)
* Some fixes will be specific to the stabilization branch and not
applicable to the master branch. Integrate such a change directly into
the stabilization branch.
- Reviewers and Committers now have an additional responsibility to
verify the target branch of each pull request.
DETAILS:
P1-P3 bug fixes, and test or doc fixes of any priority are good
candidates for integrating to jfx26 during RDP1. The only hard
restriction is that enhancements need explicit approval, over and above
the review of the PR, to go into jfx26. The bar for such approval is
appropriately high. We also need to be careful to avoid potentially
risky fixes during this time. Note that these restrictions apply to the
jfx26 branch. The master branch is open for all jfx27 fixes, including
enhancements.
As a reminder, we use a single openjdk/jfx GitHub repo with
stabilization branches [5] rather than a separate stabilization repo.
The jfx26 branch is used to stabilize the upcoming jfx26 release. Please
be aware of this, especially if you are a Reviewer or Committer in the
Project. This allows all pull requests to be in the same place, but care
needs to be taken for any PR that is targeted to jfx26 to ensure that it
doesn't contain any commits from master after the jfx26 fork date. What
that means is that if you intend a PR to be for jfx26, don't merge
master into your local source branch!
IMPORTANT: Reviewers and Committers now have an extra responsibility to
double-check the target branch of each PR that they review, integrate,
or sponsor. By default a PR will be targeted to `master` which is the
main development line (JavaFX 27 as of today). This is usually what we
want. A backport PR should be targeted to `jfx26` if, and only if, it is
intended for JavaFX 26 and meets the criteria for the current rampdown
phase (we're in RDP1 as of today). Reviewers are advised to be extra
cautious in approving potentially risky fixes targeted to `jfx26`. If
there is a concern, then a reviewer can as part of the review indicate
that the PR should be retargeted to `master` for 27. Reviewers also need
to be extra careful when reviewing PRs targeted to jfx26 that it doesn't
mistakenly contain any commits from the master branch. You'll be able to
tell because the diffs will contain changes that are not part of the fix
being reviewed. Such a PR will either need to be closed and redone, or
it will need to be rebased and force-pushed. This should be less of a
problem for this release, since almost all PRs for jfx26 will be done as
backport-style PRs, but it can still be a problem if the developer
mistakenly merges master into their backport branch.
We will use the same rules for RDP1 that the JDK uses [6], with the same
three modifications we did for the previous release:
1. Approval is needed from one of the OpenJFX project leads (not the
OpenJDK project lead)
2. Since we are not part of the JDK, we need to use labels that do not
collide with the JDK 26 release. As an obvious choice, derived from the
JBS fix version, we will use "jfx26-enhancement-request",
"jfx26-enhancement-yes", "jfx26-enhancement-no" and
"jfx26-enhancement-nmi" as corresponding labels.
3. No explicit approval (no JBS label) is needed to integrate P4 bugs to
the jfx26 branch during RDP1, as long as those bugs have otherwise met
the usual code review criteria. Having said that, most P4 bugs should
only go into master for jfx27, since we do not want to risk anything
that would destabilize the jfx26 release without a compelling reason.
Also, we have only 3 weeks until RDP2 of jfx26 and we would be better
served fixing higher priority bugs. Note that doc bugs and test bugs of
any priority are fine to fix for jfx26 during this time.
Let me know if there are any questions.
-- Kevin
[1] https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/openjfx-dev/2025-November/057615.html
[2] https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/tree/jfx26
[3] https://openjdk.org/jeps/3#Integrating-fixes-and-enhancements
[4] https://openjdk.org/guide/#working-with-backports-in-jbs
[5] https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/branches/all
[6] http://openjdk.org/jeps/3
