JFX build and deployment - squeaking wheel

[Florian Brunner]

Hi Bob,

As I understand the profiles/ project Jigsaw in the context of JavaFX is it to 
makte it easier to port Java + JavaFX to other platforms especially by 
omitting AWT. So I understand that the following packages are omitted:

javax.awt.*
javax.swing.* (dependencies to AWT)
javax.imagio.* (dependencies to AWT)

But neither are any of the following packages mentioned:

    java.beans.*
    javax.accessibility
    javax.activation
    javax.activity
    javax.annotation
    javax.jws.*
    javax.print.*
    javax.sound.*
    org.omg.*


Now, I understand that the java.beans.PropertyEditor related classes cause an 
issue because of the dependency to AWT, but the JEP 161 states that some 
packages have to be split up anyway (which will probably cause issues with 
OSGi based library, though). And Java Beans patterns (and e.g. 
PropertyChangeListener) are used at many places in applications and 
frameworks.

I think there should be a profile (maybe Compact3?), which includes everything 
except AWT related classes to allow maximum reuse and portability of existing 
3rd party libraries, which make the Java ecosystem so rich, so they can be 
used in JavaFX applications.

And another question:

The JEP 161 states:
"If a package listed in a lower Profile in this table has subpackages then 
those subpackages are included in that Profile unless they are identified as 
members of some higher Profile. Thus the java.lang.reflect package, e.g., is in 
the Compact1 Profile, but java.lang.management is in the Compact3 Profile."

But the profile Compact1 states explicitly both java.util and 
java.util.logging.

What about the following packages?

    java.util.concurrent
    java.util.concurrent.atomic
    java.util.concurrent.locks
    java.util.jar
    java.util.regex
    java.util.spi
    java.util.zip

I think it would be clearer if all subpackages were listed explicitly.

- Florian

Am Donnerstag, 8. November 2012, 16.11:31 schrieb Bob Vandette:
> There have been some questions on this list about Jigsaw, compact profiles,
> embedded, minimal VMs and the JRE customization tool called jrecreate.  
> Richard asked me to jump in to try to clear up any confusion.
> 
> Here goes ....
> 
> The Java Modularity Project (project Jigsaw) that was originally planned for
> JDK8 was deferred to JDK9. The Java Embedded team (I'm the lead) was
> expecting to use Jigsaw in order to provide smaller customizable Java
> runtimes for embedded devices.  Lacking this new functionality, we decided
> to propose a simpler alternate plan that would enhance the JDK8
> specification to allow the distribution of a small set of profiles that are
> subsets of the full Java runtime.   These are called Compact Profiles. We
> have proposed three compact profiles.  A talk and presentation that I gave
> at JavaOne describes these profiles.
> 
> https://oracleus.activeevents.com/connect/fileDownload/session/CDC887FAEAD8A
> BE54064406AC304AD59/CON4538_Vandette.pdf
> 
> The Java Enhancement Proposal (JEP) for this work is here:
> 
> http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/161
> 
> The openjdk repository that implements our current prototype is located
> here:
> 
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/profiles
> 
> The mailing list that discusses the profiles is
> build-infra-dev at openjdk.java.net since the creation of the new profiles is
> done using the new configure based JDK build system.
> 
> This repository allows you to do a build that generates the full JRE, JDK
> but in addition produces three additional image targets (compact1,
> compact2, and compact3).
> 
> In order to achieve the smallest Java runtime for embedded (our goal is
> around 10MB), we have applied changes to Hotspot that allow us to build a
> small VM (2-3MB) with reduced functionality.  The small VM (minimal) +
> compact1 profile goal we've set is around 10MB.  We're at 11MB today.
> 
> In addition to the profile bundles and the small VM, we have a reduced
> Embedded FX stack that we'll run on embedded devices such as the
> RaspberryPi.  This FX Embedded stack is a compatible FX implementation
> without media and webkit support.   The goal for this added stack is 6MB.
> 
> The jrecreate tool that some of you have asked about is not a java stripping
> tool.  It's main purpose is to assist the embedded developer in customizing
> Java runtimes.  It allows the developer to select which profile, VM,
> debugging options, compression, security and FX options.  It does not strip
> the full JRE to produce the compact profile. The jrecreate will be packaged
> with the three compact profile binaries.  It simply copies these profiles
> and applies some additional massaging based on the selected options.
> 
> We have already pushed the minimal VM changes to JDK8 hotspot and will be
> open sourcing the compact profile changes since they will be a standard
> feature of JDK8 (independent of embedded).  The current profile changes in
> our project repository are only functional for Linux x86.
> 
> We certainly recognize the value that small Java runtimes + reduced FX could
> have on Java applications published on Web App stores, but the current
> immediate plan is that the jrecreate tool is only going to be available
> with our embedded binary downloads since that's where it's needed most.  
> I've had some discussions with our Netbeans team to see what it will take
> to make Netbeans profile aware.  This might be a good way of taking
> advantage of profiles, reduced FX for producing smaller applications for
> distribution.
> 
> I hope this help,
> Bob.