error in tutorial

Ty Young youngty1997 at gmail.com
Mon Dec 30 23:41:45 UTC 2019 

On 12/30/19 10:55 AM, Anthony Vanelverdinghe wrote:
> Hi
>
> Some observations:
> This is the mentioned e-mail: 
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/openjfx-dev/2018-September/022497.html


Thanks for finding it.


> The lib folder contains a src.zip file, both in JDK 13.0.1 and in 
> JavaFX SDK 13.0.1, so this is consistent.


Consistent but irrelevant. The only jar in jdk/lib is jrt-fs by default. 
Everything else is binary .so and properties files basically.


JavaFX on the other hand has about a dozen jars and you're supposed to 
include all the Jars at once and/or make them a "library"(same thing, in 
effect).


> For NetBeans and IntelliJ IDEA (I didn't check Eclipse):
> - neither supports jmod files in libraries (see [1])


Yep. Build system and IDE support is still lacking despite Java 9 being 
released like 2 years ago now.


> - both support selecting individual jar files, after which things work 
> as expected
> - neither constructs an optimal modulepath, even if the application is 
> modular
>
> So I believe that this is mostly just a documentation issue: rather 
> than saying "add the lib folder of the SDK" it should say "add all jar 
> files in the lib folder of the SDK". 


JavaFX isn't intended to be used piecemeal. Besides, if you individually 
just include the jar files then the native libraries bundles with JavaFX 
won't be included.


> Additionally, IDEs should be improved to support jmod files in 
> libraries, and to construct optimal modulepaths for modular applications.


Good luck doing that. Netbeans still spits out a pre java 9 command line 
string that is *supposed* to be able to launch the application from the 
command line. It doesn't.


>
> Kind regards,
> Anthony
>
> [1] https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-171448
>
> On 28/12/2019 20:11, Ty Young wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12/28/19 4:53 AM, Johan Vos wrote:
>>> Hi Ty,
>>>
>>> Since I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, I have a 
>>> few questions:
>>>
>>> 1. "... push changes to the repo..."? -> It would help giving a bit 
>>> context instead of talking about "the repo". Since this is the 
>>> openjfx-dev list, chances are high you're talking about the JavaFX 
>>> repository at https://github.com/openjdk/jfx. In that case, please 
>>> read the README and CONTRIBUTING files there for advice on how to 
>>> propose/make changes (note that this will probably take longer than 
>>> 1 minute, as we have strong quality checks in place). If you talk 
>>> about a different "repo", please follow the explicit or implicit 
>>> rules on that repo(sitory). For example, if you talk about 
>>> https://github.com/openjfx/openjfx-docs , please create an issue and 
>>> file a PR, and work with the community to get it accepted. (note 
>>> that in this case, this should not be discussed on the openjfx-dev 
>>> list (note the *dev*)).
>>
>>
>> This is not an issue of documentation. IDEs can and do provide the 
>> ability to designate an entire folder as a location of project 
>> libraries. You can specify a directory manually via command line in 
>> which contains Java 9 modules. To continue to entertain the idea that 
>> this is an issue of documentation is simply crazy. It's an easily 
>> fixable technical error.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 2. You refer to informal or formal talks you had, but it is totally 
>>> unclear to me who you talked to about what. Frankly, we spent lots 
>>> of time moving all code and as much as possible the documentation to 
>>> github, so we can easily track discussions. (for JavaFX bugs, we use 
>>> JBS, so that can be discussed there) If someone said "it’s the way 
>>> we’ve always done it”" please refer to the issue where your request 
>>> has been made and subsequently rejected, so I can have a look at the 
>>> context,
>>
>>
>> It was an email a very long time ago on this list. Too lazy to dig it 
>> up, but I'm pretty sure it was from Kevin Rushforth. Again, very long 
>> time ago at this point.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 3. Can you write a few words about what the word "Community" means 
>>> to you? Many people in the JavaFX Ecosystem spent tons of spare time 
>>> in making the JavaFX "Community" a friendly place. I'm interested in 
>>> your opinion about that word. To give a few options, does it mean
>>> A: I insult people and companies, use words like "smoking shrooms" 
>>> and "stubborn" and I expect everything I think about to be fixed 
>>> magically (since I suppose the volunteers have no life apart from 
>>> doing what I want them to do)
>>
>>
>> "community" is a funny word to describe JavaFX given it is 100% owned 
>> by Oracle and which no one(AFAIK) can contribute to without signing 
>> away their rights to their own code.
>>
>>
>> If this was a feature request I'd understand this nonsense but that's 
>> not at all what this is. This is a self created, self perpetuated, 
>> and needlessly self harming *technical* error defended using the 
>> worst possible defense against very real issues(the creation of this 
>> thread is proof). Source files(or zips containing such) are not 
>> libraries(AKA "libs") and it causes IDE issues(among other things). 
>> The fix is *really* simple.
>>
>>
>> and the whole (in essence) "everyone who works on JavaFX is a someone 
>> doing it in their free time is BS. Oracle developers are payed to 
>> work on JavaFX and are the ones who originally made JavaFX(AFAIK) and 
>> (presumably) the Gradle script. If someone with basically no 
>> knowledge of Gradle such as myself can scan through a file or use 
>> ctrl + f and read variable names then I'd hope someone with actual 
>> experience could do better. Maybe I'm wrong and am the one in 
>> actuality that is smoking shrooms.
>>
>>
>>> B: I friendly discuss issues and opportunities with fellow community 
>>> members, where I respect other opinions, keep discussions polite and 
>>> technical.
>>
>>
>> That's funny because I seem to remember during a JDK(or maybe it was 
>> exclusively JavaFX?) event that a presenter made a rather rude joke 
>> about my multi-threading issue I brought up on this list a long time 
>> ago. I don't remember specifically who made the joke but I do know as 
>> someone who watches said events on YouTube that those events are very 
>> incestuous. I guess because it was the other way around that it was 
>> OK though.
>>
>>
>> TL;DR: People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
>>
>>
>>> C: somewhere between A and B?
>>>
>>> - Johan
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 12:11 AM Ty Young <youngty1997 at gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:youngty1997 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>     On 12/27/19 4:40 PM, John-Val Rose wrote:
>>>     > Ty,
>>>     >
>>>     > If it’s so easy to fix then why don’t you just fix it?
>>>
>>>
>>>     I don't exactly have the ability to directly push changes to the
>>>     repo...
>>>
>>>
>>>     >
>>>     > John-Val
>>>     >
>>>     >> On 28 Dec 2019, at 09:14, Ty Young <youngty1997 at gmail.com
>>>     <mailto:youngty1997 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>     >>
>>>     >> 
>>>     >>> On 12/27/19 4:19 AM, Johan Vos wrote:
>>>     >>> Hi David,
>>>     >>>
>>>     >>> What tutorial are you talking about? If you refer to
>>>     https://openjfx.io,
>>>     >>> that is a community-initiative, developed at
>>>     >>> https://github.com/openjfx/openjfx-docs .
>>>     >>> So if you have issues and PR's, that is the place to submit
>>>     and discuss
>>>     >>> with the other contributors to that site.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Only the Netbeans section has a warning telling you to delete
>>>     src.zip. Neither Intellij nor Eclipse do.
>>>     >>
>>>     >>
>>>     >> A user shouldn't have to do that anyway though! This could be
>>>     easily fixed. Literally all you need to do is in this section:
>>>     >>
>>>     >>
>>>     >> // Zip module sources for standalone SDK
>>>     >>      //
>>>     >>      // NOTE: the input is taken from the
>>>     modular-sdk/modules_src dir
>>>     >>      // so that we don't have to duplicate the logic and create
>>>     another
>>>     >>      // temporary directory. This is somewhat inelegant, since
>>>     the bundled sdk
>>>     >>      // and the standalone sdk should be independent of one
>>>     another, but seems
>>>     >>      // better than the alternatives.
>>>     >>      def zipSourceFilesTask =
>>>     project.task("zipSourceFilesStandalone$t.capital", type: Zip,
>>>     dependsOn: buildModulesTask) {
>>>     >>          destinationDir = file("${standaloneLibDir}")
>>>     >>          archiveName = standaloneSrcZipName
>>>     >>          includeEmptyDirs = false
>>>     >>          from modulesSrcDir
>>>     >>          include "**/*.java"
>>>     >>      }
>>>     >>
>>>     >>
>>>     >> change:
>>>

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list