+1
* more alignment with mobile
* a clean and lean low-level rendering pipeline API that would allow easier
plugability with upcoming low-level rendering systems
I would like to add a higher level desire
* a consensus that JavaFX will continue to open itself more to integration.
It has a rumour
Another one high on my list would be browser support via WebAssembly.Access
to the DOM would be secondary, or not important at all. If we had the ability
to draw then we don’t need the DOM. IMHO.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 6, 2018, at 4:00 AM, Paul Ray Russell wrote:
>
> +1
>
> * m
Yes - I agree. WASM would be great.
And I believe the folks at JPro are working on just that...
> On 6 Feb 2018, at 22:01, Stephen Desofi wrote:
>
> Another one high on my list would be browser support via WebAssembly.
> Access to the DOM would be secondary, or not important at all. If we
A poll would definitely be useful because we may find ourselves another subset.
The subset of people who even want to go “off road” to begin with. Most
people only consider going places where the road already leads—and that might
be about 99%.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb 5, 2018, at
Maybe Kevin could request that anyone who is seriously both willing and capable
to contribute to OpenJFX email him privately so that the list doesn’t get to
“see” anyone who wants to fly under the radar.
Kevin could then post the approximate number of resources actually available.
I realise of
On 05.02.2018 15:41, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
Yes, this sounds like a good step in the right direction. This would
give anyone (with a signed OCA) the ability to create their own branch,
commit changes to it, submit a PR, etc.
One non-obvious point to keep in mind is that you do need to make s
I don't kow if it is sufficient. But there's a CLA assistant for GitHub
repositories: https://github.com/cla-assistant/cla-assistant
Regards,
Michael
--
Michael Hoffer
Twitter: @mihosoft
Webpage: www.mihosoft.eu
Goethe-Zentrum für Wissenschaftliches Rechnen (G-CSC)
Goethe-Universität
Kettenhofw
I think this is a great way to frame the discussion.
To add to the part about developers sometimes being willing to
contribute part of the cost for feature X, I would say that in some
(many?) cases, those developers might even think that they are doing the
entire job by implementing feature X.
Hi,
Well Eclipse.org repositories at Github have support to track if you
signed a CLA with the Eclipse Foundation and I'm unable to merge PRs if
that check fails.
Tom
On 06.02.18 13:48, dalibor topic wrote:
>
>
> On 05.02.2018 15:41, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>> Yes, this sounds like a good step
I think ref: numbers of developers, the willingness of Oracle to open
JavaFX up to the community has not reached significant numbers. There are a
lot of people who've lost interest in following the framework a long time
ago. If we are going to improve the low level rendering API, (I've a great
deal
It looks fine to me, although the files should be change back to have
UNIX-style line endings to minimize diffs (I can easily do that when I
push the change for you).
As for the javafx.web failures, you likely won't get any different
results when building webkit. To fix these failures, you mig
On 02.02.2018 00:26, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
We are specifically looking to discuss ideas around the following areas:
* Easing barriers to contribution (e.g., making JavaFX easier to build,
better documentation, making it easier to test changes)
I'd suggest explicitly asking for feedback fro
Attached updated webrev.
Changed line endings. If something is still wrong you can change it.
You were right about the missing web source folder. Project now builds
without errors.
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Kevin Rushforth
wrote:
> It looks fine to me, although the files should be change
Attached webrev for .classpath changes for all javafx.xxx projects under
/modules (though 2 of them are not modules).
Change details:
- The files were completely rewritten for Eclipse's current modular
support, version 4.8M5, which is pre-release.
- Some projects also need to change module-info.ja
Hi Kevin,
Please review the below simple fix.
JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8196592
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbilla/8196592/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Murali
On 02/05/2018 08:14 PM, John-Val Rose wrote:
... is it possible that there are lots and lots of “observers” or “lurkers” out
there just waiting until all the hard work of setting-up the physical and
formal infrastructure to enable community contribution has been finalised
before they’ll put th
Thanks for confirming my “theory” :-)
And just for clarity, I wasn’t referring to “observers” or “lurkers” in a
derogatory fashion. In fact, it makes complete sense to only get involved when
it enables you to make the most efficient use of your time.
Who knows, the size of the “talent pool” may
Another thing to be careful about with the sandbox/staging idea is the
confusion that will arise with duplication. There will be 2 issue trackers
(JBS and GitHub (or GitHub-like)), 2 repo addresses, 2 wikis, and maybe 2
discussion lists. For those "in the know" this will be a simple matter, but
for
>> 2018-02-06 14:29 GMT+01:00 dalibor topic :
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02.02.2018 00:26, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
We are specifically looking to discuss ideas around the following areas:
* Easing barriers to contribution (e.g., making JavaFX easier to build,
better documentati
+1
This makes sense. Having a list of who might be willing to contribute and in what
areas they are willing to contribute dictates where we can go. As Rumsfeld once said
"You go to war with the army have, not the one you want".
Steve
Sent from iCloud
On Feb 06, 2018, at 06:41 AM, John-
I would recommend against having a separate issue tracker or mailing
list associated with the sandbox. That will create more confusion than
any benefit you might have.
-- Kevin
Nir Lisker wrote:
Another thing to be careful about with the sandbox/staging idea is the
confusion that will arise
Looks good.
-- Kevin
Nir Lisker wrote:
Attached updated webrev.
Changed line endings. If something is still wrong you can change it.
You were right about the missing web source folder. Project now builds
without errors.
On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Kevin Rushforth
mailto:kevin.rushfo.
Many years ago I had a discussion with Jonathan Giles about if the things that
were being made in JFXtras would eventually become part of the JavaFX core. In
the end I decided that, for me personally, I could do the things I wanted to
perfectly in a separate project. The rigid structure that Ja
Obviously everyone is at ControlsFX instead ;-)
Part of the drop I would suggest is simply that many of the itches people
want to scratch are now scratched. Alternatively, the remaining itches are
either in more complex controls (*cough* docking frameworks *cough*) or in
areas beneath the controls
Jonathan - why do you *cough* at ideas like more complex controls and docking
frameworks?
I think that a docking framework especially would be a great addition to JavaFX.
Am I missing something?
> On 7 Feb 2018, at 18:16, Jonathan Giles wrote:
>
> Obviously everyone is at ControlsFX instead ;
While it's good to know who is interested in what areas, I think it's hard
to create a list of interested or capable people as that depends on
motivations.
There are many developers who used to work on the JavaFX team who are now
working elsewhere. That means there is plenty of knowledge and potent
26 matches
Mail list logo