HEADS-UP: switching to gradle 1.8 for next week's build

[Scott Palmer]

I guess I don't quite understand the "packaging and distribution" process.
 If the packaging and distribution runs gradlew instead of gradle, what
does it matter if the project was changed to use a different version?
 There will effectively be no dependencies that aren't resolved by the
gradlew script (which is checked in with the source code) at build time -
including the dependency on gradle itself.  Are the machines that this
would run on not able to access the internet?

Scott


On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:45 PM, Mario Torre <neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com
> wrote:

> Hi Scott,
>
> The issue me and Keving were discussing is not much about being able to
> use the correct version of Gradle for JavaFX developers, but having such
> version a moving target for packaging. If you're building locally, there's
> no real problem, but for packaging and distribution in a Linux distro like
> Fedora or Ubuntu or SuSe having dependencies that keep changing is very
> problematic.
>
> Of course, upstream should rarely care about those problems unless they
> want to be nice for downstream users :)
>
> I hope this explain a bit more why my concerns regarding this topic.
>
> Cheers,
> Mario
>
>
>
> 2013/11/20 Scott Palmer <swpalmer at gmail.com>
>
>> Consider using the gradle wrapper.  That should eliminate issues with
>> Linux distributions not having the right version of Gradle or any devs
>> needing to worry about being on the "official" version. Those wanting to
>> test with more recent version will still be able to do so.
>> http://www.gradle.org/docs/current/userguide/gradle_wrapper.html
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:31 PM, Kevin Rushforth <
>> kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mario,
>>>
>>> I am usually reluctant to have build tools changes in an update release,
>>> too, so we will certainly take your concern very seriously.
>>>
>>> As for JavaFX 8 entering maintenance mode, we expect to do most of our
>>> work over the next few months in 8u20 (rather than 9), since we are
>>> deferring a lot of bugs out of 8. Any new features will be done in 9, but
>>> probably not until after 8u20 is in very good shape.
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Kevin
>>>
>>>
>>> Mario Torre wrote:
>>>
>>>> 2013/11/20 Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com <mailto:
>>>> kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     We might do an upgrade during some JDK 8u release (e.g., 8u20 or
>>>>     8u40), but there would need to be a good reason to do so.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm, I really hope this won't be done, it would likely prevent to
>>>> release newer JavaFX (meaning more work to backport fixes).
>>>>
>>>> Will JavaFX 8 enter maintainance mode? I was of the idea that once
>>>> OpenJFX8 is released for JDK8 then all the development would go into *JFX9
>>>> for *JDK9 (with only bug fixing and perhaps stabilisation fixes), no?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Mario
>>>> --
>>>> pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF
>>>> Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA  FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF
>>>>
>>>> IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org <http://www.icedrobot.org>
>>>>
>>>> Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/
>>>> Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org
>>>> OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/
>>>>
>>>> Please, support open standards:
>>>> http://endsoftpatents.org/
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF
> Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA  FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF
>
> IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org
> Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/
> Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org
> OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/
>
> Please, support open standards:
> http://endsoftpatents.org/
>