JavaFX 11 maven snapshots - empty jars

[Johan Vos]

That's a good question.

I think we might open the discussion to IDE's in general.

Basically, there are 3 layers involved here:
1. the artifacts, stored in repositories (maven central or jcenter for
example).
2. the build tools (maven and gradle): they have their own appoaches for
downloading artifacts, solving transitive dependencies, dealing with
platform classifiers, setting up classpath/modulepath for compiletime and
runtime (optionally via plugins)
3. the IDE's. They typically work with both build tools, but can have their
own mechanism as well.

The combination leads to a large set of possible configurations. But since
this is not really JavaFX specific, I wonder if the jigsaw mailinglist
contains discussions about this, or whether that is left to the tool/IDE
vendors?

- Johan

Op vr 13 jul. 2018 om 17:01 schreef Kevin Rushforth <
kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>:

> Would it help Eclipse if instead of an empty jar, the jar contained just
> the module-info.class file? Or will that then cause problems because of
> two .jar files with the same module name?
>
> -- Kevin
>
>
> On 7/13/2018 7:37 AM, Johan Vos wrote:
> > Hi Steve,
> >
> > Yes, that has been considered, but I'm more than happy to re-open the
> > discussion.
> >
> > The problem with javafx-controls-${javafx.platform} as the artifactId is
> > that in that case, the gradle developer is in all cases required to add
> the
> > platform suffix to the dependency, which makes it very hard to manage
> > JavaFX projects via version control, as the dependency file will
> hard-code
> > contain e.g. javafx-controls-linux, where other developers would use
> > javafx-controls-windows
> >
> > - Johan
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 4:30 PM Steve Hruda <steve.hruda at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> Johan asked me to move the empty jar discussion to the mailing list.
> >>
> >> As I mentioned at GitHub, we did some tests with the published
> SNAPSHOT's
> >> and we had to force an exclude of the empty jars at the dependecies.
> >> Otherwise e.g. Eclipse shows a warning that the module name is instable
> >> because of the "auto-generated" module name in case of the empty jars.
> >>
> >> Thanks at Joeri for explaining the reason. I understand now the reason
> for
> >> the empty jar.
> >>
> https://github.com/javafxports/openjdk-jfx/pull/83#issuecomment-404828804
> >>
> >> I never tried it and I know that it doesn't fit to the familar handling
> of
> >> platform dependent jars...
> >>
> >> Have you thought about it to use the platform variable at the
> artifactId?
> >> Something like:
> >> <artifactId>javafx-controls-${javafx.platform}</artifactId>
> >>
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Steve
> >>
>
>