Re: Swing module's module-info file

Hi Nir, I currently use the attached stash to make Eclipse compile all modules. Unfortunately I have to modify the following java-Files to get away without any compile errors: * Dialog => Added a method getDialog() instead of directly accessing the field * javafx.fxml => Add a static

Re: Swing module's module-info file

Ah, yes, I was trying to see what modifications each project needs so I didn't have it modified. Can you share your Swing .classpath? Eclipse gives me a NPE during the build task, I think something broke. On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 8:54 PM, Tom Schindl wrote: > Oh but naturally my .classpath-File i

[12] Review request: 8209040: Change JavaFX release version to 12

Please review the following to bump the feature version (aka major version) of openjfx to 12: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8209040 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/8209040/webrev/ As a note, I will wait to push this until the repo is tagged with 11+22 (the RDP2 build). I will then a

OpenJFX 11 is in Rampdown Phase Two (RDP2)

To: OpenJFX Developers As a reminder, OpenJFX 11 is now in Rampdown Phase Two RDP2. [1] During RDP2, all bug fixes, except for docs and test fixes, and all enhancements will need explicit approval to go in. Note that these restrictions apply to the soon-to-be-created openjfx/11-dev/rt repo [2]

Re: Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

...and please don’t forget the packager services! Perhaps it could be made available as a maven module? /Lennart Börjeson Electrogramma ab iPhono meo missum est > 7 aug. 2018 kl. 19:54 skrev Kevin Rushforth : > > We're still aiming for that, although it might be a bit after JDK 11 ships. > >

Re: Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

We're still aiming for that, although it might be a bit after JDK 11 ships. -- Kevin On 8/7/2018 10:02 AM, Michael Paus wrote: I don't know whether the following statement is still valid, but if it is, then it may not be worth the effort to resurrect the old javapackager if at least an EA bui

Re: Swing module's module-info file

Oh but naturally my .classpath-File is modified Tom On 07.08.18 19:51, Tom Schindl wrote: > Yes they do! > > Tom > > On 07.08.18 19:36, Nir Lisker wrote: >> And both newimlp and oldimpl packages compile for you? >> >> On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Tom Schindl >

Re: Swing module's module-info file

There is no reason they won't both compile with JDK 11. In this case, the implementation is selected at runtime. When compiling with JDK 10, the 'newimpl' package is excluded. -- Kevin On 8/7/2018 10:36 AM, Nir Lisker wrote: And both newimlp and oldimpl packages compile for you? On Tue, Aug

Re: Swing module's module-info file

Yes they do! Tom On 07.08.18 19:36, Nir Lisker wrote: > And both newimlp and oldimpl packages compile for you? > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Tom Schindl > wrote: > > Hi Nir, > > I'm using OpenJDK-11 in my eclipse for development so I have that

Re: Swing module's module-info file

And both newimlp and oldimpl packages compile for you? On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 8:04 PM, Tom Schindl wrote: > Hi Nir, > > I'm using OpenJDK-11 in my eclipse for development so I have that module > included. > > Tom > > On 07.08.18 18:34, Nir Lisker wrote: > > So you rebuilt the JDK with the new jd

Re: Swing module's module-info file

Hi Nir, I'm using OpenJDK-11 in my eclipse for development so I have that module included. Tom On 07.08.18 18:34, Nir Lisker wrote: > So you rebuilt the JDK with the new jdk.unsupported.desktop module? > > On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 3:11 PM, Tom Schindl > wrote:

Re: Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

I don't know whether the following statement is still valid, but if it is, then it may not be worth the effort to resurrect the old javapackager if at least an EA build of the new one is so close. On 6/27/2018 3:30 PM, Kevin Rushforth wrote: /We're aiming to get this into JDK 12 early enough so

Re: Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

Someone could certainly do that. We think there is enough interest in having a standard tool that it is worth spending effort on a replacement tool that will be part of standard JDK builds, including OpenJDK builds that have never had javapackager. In the mean time, if a standalone build of ja

Re: Swing module's module-info file

So you rebuilt the JDK with the new jdk.unsupported.desktop module? On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 3:11 PM, Tom Schindl wrote: > Well I simply added the folder to my class-folders and things then work > perfectly fine inside Eclipse > > Tom > > On 07.08.18 14:02, Nir Lisker wrote: > > Thanks for the inf

Re: Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

The motivation for a new packager states a need for a a packager, but not why the javapackager can't continue. With all the work that went into javapackager, why can't it simple be released for continued development outside Oracle, if they don't want to maintain it. The javapackager has worked we

[11] Review request: 8201563: Update copyright header for files modified in 2018

Please review the following to update the date in the copyright header (JDK-8201563) and also fix a garbled copyright header (JDK-8202357). https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8201563 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8202357 http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~kcr/8201563/webrev/ -- Kevin

Re: OpenJFX status update

Have anyone tried to build the javapackager code with OpenJDK 11 and create a javapackager executable file? It could be used as a standalone tool until the new jpackager is ready. This shouldn't be too hard to do, presuming that you can't use the javapackager from JDK 10. You will need to ad

Re: OpenJFX status update

> > The javapackager tool and associated jdk.packager and > jdk.packager.services modules have been removed from the JDK along with > JavaFX. They are not part of the standalone JavaFX builds. > > -- Kevin > > What options are there if one relies on the javapackager to create native runtime images

Re: OpenJFX 11 in OSGi

Hi, No this is an Equinox only solution! I'm not sure Felix does provide a way to hook into the classloading system and catch problems. The approach of dynamically spinning up a layer although should work in general. I'm not sure about the Classloader-Delegation in Felix but if you write a custo

Re: OpenJFX 11 in OSGi

On 2018-08-07T14:22:10 +0200 Tom Schindl wrote: > Hi, > > For those not following my blog [1]. We've managed to successfully run > OpenJFX-11 modules inside Equinox using the same approach we've already > supplied for FXCanvas. We "simply" spin up a new Module-Layer containing > the JavaFX-bits.

Re: Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

Can you subscribe to core-libs-dev and reply to the JEP discussion indicating how you use UserJvmOptions? We hadn't planned on providing the jdk.packager.services module (at least not in the initial version), but would be interested to know how useful it was. Having said that, the module is sti

Re: OpenJFX 11 in OSGi

Nice! -- Kevin On 8/7/2018 5:22 AM, Tom Schindl wrote: Hi, For those not following my blog [1]. We've managed to successfully run OpenJFX-11 modules inside Equinox using the same approach we've already supplied for FXCanvas. We "simply" spin up a new Module-Layer containing the JavaFX-bits. T

Re: OpenJFX 11 in OSGi

Hi, For those not following my blog [1]. We've managed to successfully run OpenJFX-11 modules inside Equinox using the same approach we've already supplied for FXCanvas. We "simply" spin up a new Module-Layer containing the JavaFX-bits. Tom [1]https://tomsondev.bestsolution.at/2018/08/04/support

Re: Swing module's module-info file

Well I simply added the folder to my class-folders and things then work perfectly fine inside Eclipse Tom On 07.08.18 14:02, Nir Lisker wrote: > Thanks for the info. I'm working on updating the Eclipse files and this is > causing problems for javafx.swing. When will the minimum version be bumped

Re: Swing module's module-info file

Thanks for the info. I'm working on updating the Eclipse files and this is causing problems for javafx.swing. When will the minimum version be bumped to 11? On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 7:51 AM, Prasanta Sadhukhan < prasanta.sadhuk...@oracle.com> wrote: > This is because if fx is compiled with a jdk ve

Re: Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

Well, while I can surely use the packager from JDK 10 and bundle my application with 11, I'd still miss out on the packager service, i.e. the application would not be able to use the UserJvmOptions. It seems to me the packager service has been completely forgotten? JDK-8200758 does not mention

Re: Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

Hi Lennart, You should be able to use the packager from JDK 10, see https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8203379. There is a draft for a replacement, see https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200758. - Nir On Tue, Aug 7, 2018 at 12:28 PM, Lennart Börjeson wrote: > I'm migrating to JDK

Re: Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

We are proposing a JEP to add a new 'jpackager' tool [1] as a replacement for javapackager. The discussion is on core-libs-dev [2] [3] [4]. -- Kevin [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200758 [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2018-May/053503.html [3] http://m

Fate of jdk.packager and jdk.packager.services?

I'm migrating to JDK 11 and OpenJFX 11, and would like to continue using the packager and the associated packager service (i.e. the UserJvmOptions). AFAIK, those are gone from the available binary builds, but still there in the code. Is there a way to use them without resorting to build openjfx