OpenJFX status update

[Alan Snyder]

That sounds like a good idea.

  Alan


> On May 16, 2018, at 10:08 AM, Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> The javapackager was removed from the Oracle JDK along with JavaFX (and has never been part of OpenJDK). It isn't included with the standalone JavaFX bundles, and doesn't really fit in a standalone FX release.
> 
> We are looking at the possibility of providing a replacement packaging tool in OpenJDK.
> 
> -- Kevin
> 
> On 5/15/2018 3:16 PM, Alan Snyder wrote:
>> Where does java packager fit in this?
>> 
>> 
>>> On May 15, 2018, at 2:59 PM, Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I wanted to update you on the progress of the last couple weeks on the OpenJFX project:
>>> 
>>> 1. As mentioned last week, we now have EA builds of OpenJFX 11 on java.net [1]. We intend to update this roughly weekly. Currently the build numbers match the corresponding JDK build number, but that will not necessarily be the case going forward, so don't assume that they are in sync.
>>> 
>>> 2. Barring any build or staging issues, this week's OpenJFX 11 EA build will include the jmods as mentioned earlier [2] [3]
>>> 
>>> 3. JavaFX has been removed from JDK 11 as of this week. Starting with jdk-11+14, early access builds of JDK 11 will not include JavaFX.
>>> 
>>> 4. After jdk-11+14 is posted on java.net, and FX is no longer included in JDK 11, we will start using openjfx-11 as the fix version in JBS to distinguish it from JDK 11. We still expect to do a release of JavaFX 11 around the same time as JDK 11, but using a different release number will help track the actual content of JavaFX 11 separately from JDK 11.
>>> 
>>> 5. Once this settles down, possibly later this week, I hope to restart the discussion about OpenJFX policies, etc. I also hope to be a bit more responsive over the coming days / weeks than I have been for the last 3-4 weeks. Getting the standalone OpenJFX working and removing JavaFX from the JDK was quite time consuming as you can probably imagine.
>>> 
>>> If you have any general comments or questions about any of this, please reply to this thread. We may want to split out more detailed discussions into their own thread to make it easier to follow.
>>> 
>>> -- Kevin
>>> 
>>> [1] http://jdk.java.net/openjfx/
>>> 
>>> [2] http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/openjfx-dev/2018-May/021856.html
>>> [3] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8202368
>>> 
>