Dependencies on java.desktop

[Tom Schindl]

Uff - I'd like to revisit this topic. As I did some jlink stuff for our 
applications adding java.desktop once more bugged me.

I guess the first thing to do is to file a JIRA-Ticket but it really 
starts to bug me to include java.desktop although I don't plan to use 
printing (and I guess > 90% of the JavaFX don't use the printing API 
either but produce PDFs or whatever) and Java-Beans.

Tom

Am 27.03.18 um 14:26 schrieb Kevin Rushforth:
> Hi Tom,
> 
> Yes, this is an unfortunate dependency. It is "only" an implementation 
> dependency, meaning that nothing in the public API depends on 
> java.desktop (which is why we don't "requires transient java.desktop"), 
> so it should be possible to remove this dependency in the future. As 
> noted, it is only there because Java Beans is part of the java.desktop 
> module.
> 
> In the interim, your suggestion of "requires static java.base" could be 
> the way to go. It would need a spec change to the JavaFX beans adapter 
> classes documenting that they would throw an 
> UnsupportedOperationException if java.desktop was not present at 
> runtime, along with a recommendation that applications needing that 
> functionality should add "requires java.desktop" to their own 
> module-info.java.
> 
> Note that this would only help non-graphical JavaFX applications that 
> use javafx.base for its collections, properties, and bindings, since 
> javafx.graphics requires java.desktop in a way that currently cannot 
> easily be made optional (not without reimplementing printing support 
> anyway).
> 
> -- Kevin
> 
> 
> Tom Schindl wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Anyone else has an opinion on that? Is require static the way to go?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> On 21.03.18 23:23, Tom Schindl wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I always thought the JavaFX-Codebase should be able to run with just the
>>> java.base module but I was browsing the codebase a bit and was suprised
>>> (or rather shocked) that even the base-module requires java.desktop.
>>>
>>> If I get it correct this because of the java.beans (provided by the
>>> adapters) stuff is found in there. Why hasn't the requires there not
>>> defined as:
>>>
>>> requires static java.desktop;
>>>
>>> Tom
>>>