Anyone using JMX with JavaFX?

[Felix Bembrick]

I am sorry if this is a question you would prefer not to answer but I
believe the answer is significant.

I am sure the entire JavaFX community would love to know if Oracle "eats
their own dog food" so to speak.

Felix

On 9 June 2016 at 10:02, Felix Bembrick <felix.bembrick at gmail.com> wrote:

> So, if I'm not correct, does that mean that by choosing option 1, there
> will no remaining usage of JavaFX internally by Oracle themselves?
>
> Felix
>
> On 9 June 2016 at 08:31, Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
>> As some of you may be aware, JavaFX has shipped a JMX plugin as a
>> separate jar file along with the JDK (not part of the JRE) in
>> <JDK>/lib/javafx-mx.jar. Development on this plugin stopped prior to JDK 8
>> being shipped, although we continued to ship javafx-mx.jar in JDK 8.
>>
>> Are there any developers that still use this? We haven't seen any bug
>> reports or had questions on it for quite a while. I note that this jar file
>> has been gone from JDK 9 ea since build 111 and we are trying to determine
>> how best to address this in JDK 9.
>>
>> Our options are:
>>
>> 1) Remove it entirely and drop this tooling support
>>
>> 2) Continue to ship it as a legacy jar file, meaning that any use would
>> require command line qualified exports to be added since it uses internal
>> packages
>>
>> 3) Turn it into a proper JDK-only module, javafx.jmx; it would not be one
>> of the default modules, so it would need to be added with -addmods.
>>
>> Obviously #1 would be the least amount of work, and given that it isn't
>> being actively maintained, might be a viable solution. If we do need to
>> keep it, then #2 might be less effort than #3, while still preserving the
>> ability for developers to use it. This is only used for tooling, so
>> requiring qualified exports, as is done for Robot and PerformanceTracker,
>> is not a problem.
>>
>> Separately, if we don't remove it for JDK 9, we probably will deprecate
>> it with the intention to remove it in a future release.
>>
>> -- Kevin
>>
>>
>