JDK-8198795: Remove IDE specific files from the source code repository

[Nir Lisker]

So you're adding read edges in the module-info files via "requires". I
didn't do this because these files are shared and we can't have 2 versions
of them.
I added the read edges via "--add-reads" in the .classpath files. This way
Eclipse solves its own problems without external changes. However, since
Eclipse modular support is still in progress, it's impossible to create a
valid run configuration with these modules. There are several bugs being
tracked regarding this approach (I can dig them up if you're interested).

Once the java.logging dependency is removed we will be able to simplify our
solutions and I'll post my .classpaths.

Well until someone proofs that those setups can be generated I think should
> maintain them.


If no one disagrees by the time java.logging is removed I'll file an issue
to update the Eclipse files.

Dialog: see https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=532850
>

I assume it's the "The blank final field dialog may not have
been initialized" error. It doesn't stop the building at least, unlike the
module stuff.

- Nir

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:31 AM, Tom Schindl <tom.schindl at bestsolution.at>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Well until someone proofs that those setups can be generated I think
> should maintain them.
>
> My current Eclipse-Setup changes can been seen at [1]. The compile error
> I still see are:
>
> * base: because of jul (i fixed that in my module-info.java) with
>   "requires static java.logging;"
>
> * controls:
>   - Dialog: see https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=532850
>   - jul with "requires static java.logging;" in module-info.java
>
> * fxml:
>   - adding "requires static javafx.controls;" to compile Junit
>
> * web:
>   - adding "requires static java.management;" to compile
>
> Tom
>
> [1]https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/
> compare/master...BestSolution-at:eclipse-setup?expand=1
>
> On 18.04.18 15:39, Nir Lisker wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > Iv'e been using the same setup. We first need to
> > fix https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8195974. Iv'e addressed a
> > comment there to you.
> > Then we can discuss and compare files, but I'm not clear on whether they
> > should be committed.
> >
> > - Nir
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Tom Schindl
> > <tom.schindl at bestsolution.at <mailto:tom.schindl at bestsolution.at>>
> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi,
> >
> >     I've also worked on the Eclipse specific files. We should compare
> yours
> >     and mine (I've been doing this on Photon-builds against JDK-10).
> >
> >     Tom
> >
> >     On 18.04.18 12:29, Nir Lisker wrote:
> >     > Hi all,
> >     >
> >     > There were several discussion in GitHub about removing IDE files
> >     (they are
> >     > linked from the JBS issue [1]). At the end, I didn't see any
> >     decision or
> >     > any change.
> >     >
> >     > I would like to update the Eclipse files soon since the cleanup
> [2] is
> >     > almost done. These files allow anyone who checks out OpenJFX to
> start
> >     > working immediately. If these files are not provided, they would
> >     need to
> >     > manually configure them and currently that's a bit tricky.
> >     >
> >     > I would like to know the current stand on this.
> >     >
> >     > Thanks,
> >     > Nir
> >     >
> >     > [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198795
> >     <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8198795>
> >     >
> >     > [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8195798
> >     <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8195798>
> >     >
> >
> >
>