JavaFX 8.0

[Daniel Zwolenski]

Excellent. Thanks. 

Just while we're on the version/release topic, does "fix: Lombard" in jira stil mean "not for the foreseeable future" or is it a code name for a specific release version?



On 16/08/2012, at 11:39 PM, Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:

> Putting jfxrt.jar on the default classpath is planned for JDK8 / FX8.
> 
> -- Kevin
> 
> 
> Daniel Zwolenski wrote:
>> 
>>> The intent is that within the Java 9 timeframe we will have formed a JSR
>>> and submitted JavaFX as a Java specification. The end result would be that
>>> JavaFX would form a core part of Java (presumably in its own module by
>>> then). Of course, we ship with Java 7 now, and will integrate more tightly
>>> with Java 8 (as shown by the numbering announced today). Integrating more
>>> tightly with Java 8 will allow us to, for example, make use of lambda's etc.
>>>     
>> 
>> 
>> Cool but my real question is when will JFX be put on the classpath as part
>> of the install of the JRE - will it be 7, 8 or 9? :)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>   
>>> -- Jonathan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 16/08/2012 3:53 p.m., Daniel Zwolenski wrote:
>>> 
>>>     
>>>> Good move. Keeping track of which version is which is kind of hard a the
>>>> moment. Marrying it to the JRE version number will help.
>>>> 
>>>> Will be changing the 2.x versions going forward or just the 3.0 ones? i.e.
>>>> will jfx 2.2.4 be jfx 7u10?
>>>> 
>>>> What's with the shipping with 'JavaSE 9', I thought we were shipping now,
>>>> and hoping to be fully integrated (i.e on the classpath) by Java 8.
>>>> Wishful
>>>> thinking?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Richard Bair <richard.bair at oracle.com>*
>>>> *wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>  Hi,
>>>>       
>>>>> Now that JavaFX 2.2 is out the door, we are creating 2.2.2 repositories
>>>>> for the minor update due later this year, and the 8.0 repositories we'll
>>>>> be
>>>>> using for the release we had been calling 3.0. In essence, we felt that
>>>>> since we are shipping with JavaSE and plan (pending JCP approval) to
>>>>> become
>>>>> part of JavaSE 9, that we needed to get our version numbers in line with
>>>>> JavaSE. It can be quite confusing to explain to people, for example, that
>>>>> JavaFX 2.2.2 ships with JavaSE 7u8. Or I could ask, what version of
>>>>> JavaFX
>>>>> will ship with JavaSE 7u10? 2.2.4 is probably the right answer, but heck,
>>>>> even I don't always know.
>>>>> 
>>>>> So instead, we've decided to bump up the version number for the next
>>>>> major
>>>>> release in order to align with JavaSE. It makes double sense since we are
>>>>> aligned on release schedule as well.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 
>>>>>