That is good news and will probably make a lot of things easier.
Michael
Am 13.02.18 um 22:50 schrieb Kevin Rushforth:
There is a big difference because you just don't have to bundle all
these
other things with the JDK because you can add them later if you need
them.
This is different from t
There is a big difference because you just don't have to bundle all these
other things with the JDK because you can add them later if you need
them.
This is different from the OpenJDK-OpenJFX combo which has to be built
and distributed together for technical reasons.
We are working to elimin
On 09.02.2018 21:32, Sven Reimers wrote:
Hi,
so we will need a JSR first and get it added to SE afterwards.
That does not sound very feasible.
Any comments?
JDK 10 is in rampdown phase 2, per
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/10/ . No new features would be
added at this phase.
Java
On 09.02.2018 19:28, John Neffenger wrote:
You can comment there if you're interested in seeing support for JavaFX
be part of the default installation of OpenJDK 9 or 10 on Ubuntu. I'm
hoping it can get included in time for the next Long Term Support
release of Ubuntu 18.04 in April.
See h
Hi,
so we will need a JSR first and get it added to SE afterwards.
That does not sound very feasible.
Any comments?
Sven
Am 09.02.2018 18:53 schrieb "dalibor topic" :
> On 09.02.2018 15:07, Michael Paus wrote:
>
>> Who defines that everything Open... can only contain what is included in
>>
On 2018-02-09T10:28:56 -0800
John Neffenger wrote:
>
> I reported the bug below to fix this same issue for Ubuntu:
>
> JavaFX support is in Oracle JDK 9 but missing in Ubuntu OpenJDK 9
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openjdk-9/+bug/1721852
>
> You can comment there if you're interest
On 02/09/2018 05:29 AM, Mark Raynsford wrote:
I've been exploring the possibility of migrating to JavaFX on and off,
but the biggest showstopper for me is that JavaFX may not actually be
present in any given user's installation. If someone installs the
jre9-openjdk package on Arch Linux, for exam
On 09.02.2018 15:07, Michael Paus wrote:
Who defines that everything Open... can only contain what is included in
"the spec"?
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/
"The goal of this long-running Project is to produce a series of
open-source reference implementations of the Java SE Platform, a
Am 09.02.18 um 15:22 schrieb Mario Torre:
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Michael Paus wrote:
Am 09.02.18 um 14:49 schrieb Mario Torre:
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Mark Raynsford
wrote:
I suppose what I'm really saying is: When (if ever) can I expect JavaFX
to be present unconditionally
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Michael Paus wrote:
> Am 09.02.18 um 14:49 schrieb Mario Torre:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Mark Raynsford
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I suppose what I'm really saying is: When (if ever) can I expect JavaFX
>>> to be present unconditionally with OpenJDK installs? I
On 2018-02-09T14:49:23 +0100
Mario Torre wrote:
>
> JavaFX is not part of the Java specifications for the JDK or its
> runtime, so the presence of the library in any distribution of OpenJDK
> pretty much depends on the vendor distributing you the binaries.
Ah, my mistake then. I thought it actual
On 2018-02-09T13:44:55 +
Johan Vos wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> Is using jlink (https://docs.oracle.com/javase/9/tools/jlink.htm) packaging
> your app with the exact set of modules you need an option for you?
> That would eliminate the need for your users to have Java installed. Not
> only there is
JEE is not part of the spec but is “in addition to”.Maybe FX should be
treated the same way with its own standards body.
Maybe even with it’s own independent platform implementations based on a
common spec just like JEE. Hmm. Thinking out loud here.
Steve
Sent from my iPhone
> On Feb
Am 09.02.18 um 14:49 schrieb Mario Torre:
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Mark Raynsford wrote:
I suppose what I'm really saying is: When (if ever) can I expect JavaFX
to be present unconditionally with OpenJDK installs? I probably can't
migrate to JavaFX until that day...
JavaFX is not part
On Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 2:29 PM, Mark Raynsford wrote:
> I suppose what I'm really saying is: When (if ever) can I expect JavaFX
> to be present unconditionally with OpenJDK installs? I probably can't
> migrate to JavaFX until that day...
JavaFX is not part of the Java specifications for the JDK
Hi Mark,
Is using jlink (https://docs.oracle.com/javase/9/tools/jlink.htm) packaging
your app with the exact set of modules you need an option for you?
That would eliminate the need for your users to have Java installed. Not
only there is a (small) hurdle to install Java, but it needs to be the
"c
Hello!
I've been using Swing for many years. One of the things I like most
about it is that it's essentially guaranteed to be present in any Java
SE installation, and although it's a little outdated aesthetically, it
works well and continues to work well.
I've been exploring the possibility of mi
17 matches
Mail list logo
