Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] e(fx)clipse participating in Mars release

[Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx>]

I think I keep asking this question, but isn't there a way to define a new execution environment to describe the environment that enables JavaFX on Java 8? I thought that's what they were for.

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Rogers network.
  Original Message
From: Tom Schindl
Sent: Monday, September 8, 2014 4:09 AM
To: cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Reply To: Cross project issues
Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] e(fx)clipse participating in Mars release


Hi,

>From a e(fx)clipse point of view we will load the javafx libraries from
the JRE you are running on and JavaFX is a singleton like anything you
get from the JRE as well (you can not load multiple version of javafx at
once!), if you are running on JRE 1.7 you get JavaFX 2.2 classes if you
run on JRE 1.8 you get JavaFX8 classes.

If you require Java8 features you need *your* bundle to require a an EE
for JavaSE-1.8 (in reality this might not be enough because what you'd
really want to spec is that you want OpenJDK/OracleJDK 1.8!).

Our fake bundle will never define an EE itself.

Please also note that because JavaFX is NOT JSRed they are adding
methods and features inside Java8 releases as well so an EE (e.g. in
8u40 you get a Dialog-API, ...).

The versioned package exports only tell you in which JavaFX release the
package was exposed the first time - I know this is not proper use of
OSGi-Versions and maybe we should have omitted them completely but that
would be a breaking change for anyone out there having versioned package
imports on the other had simply updateing them to javafx 8.0 seems
invalid as well.

In case there's consensus from people here that our version package
exports are so wrong that this blocks integration I'm willing to break
people and require them to update their applications to use unversion
package imports.

Tom

On 07.09.14 11:57, Alexander Nyßen wrote:
> Let me add another question to this discussion: As JavaFX 8 is now
> around (in addition to JavaFX 2.2), what will be the strategy to deal
> with the different JavaFX versions?
>
> Up to now it seems the org.eclipse.javafx bundle exports the javafx
> packages with version constraints. As its a singleton, there will only
> be one org.eclipse.javafx bundle in an Eclipse installation, and for
> clients (with package imports) the available JavaFX version will thus
> depend on that bundle's package exports. However, org.eclipse.javafx is
> just a dummy bundle, so the version of the actually loaded JavaFX
> classes will IMHO depend on the JRE that was used to start the
> application (or whatever strategy the org.eclipse.fx.osgi fragment uses
> to locate them).
>
> How can you ensure that stays consistent? Doesn't it mean you will have
> to remove the version constraints from the org.eclipse.javafx bundle as
> soon as you are going to support multiple JavaFX versions (so the
> version will be decided at runtime when org.eclipse.fx.osgi loads the
> classes)? And wouldn't that imply that clients could also not specify
> version constraints on their package imports, because these could
> otherwise not be resolved? If this was the case, then would not the
> bundle's BREE be the right  indicator for its required JavaFX version
> (as its done for all other JRE provided classes; of course implicating
> some support for JavaFX within the Execution Environment Descriptors)?
> Or does it mean for Mars there will only be an org.eclipse.javafx bundle
> that is bound to BREE 1.8 and exposes JavaFX 8 only (and there will be
> no support for JavaFX 2.2 and BREE 1.7)?
>
> Cheers
> Alexander
>
> Am 22.08.2014 um 09:17 schrieb Alexander Nyßen
> <Alexander.Nyssen@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:Alexander.Nyssen@xxxxxxxxx>>:
>
>> Tom,
>>
>>>
>>>> I suppose all this means that no bundle with javafx dependencies can
>>>> resolve or run without this specific org.eclipse.fx.javafx bundle being
>>>> present.  Again, it's none of my personal business, but if this is
>>>> indeed the only solution, would Orbit be a better host for such a thing?
>>>
>>> org.eclipse.fx.javafx and org.eclipse.fx.osgi have to be in your runtime.
>>
>> what I infer from your detailed elaboration (thanks for bringing light
>> into the darkness) is that it would make no sense at all to separate
>> org.eclipse.fx.javafx from org.eclipse.fx.osgi, because without the
>> org.eclipse.fx.osgi fragment the org.eclipse.javafx bundle would be
>> useless at runtime.
>>
>> Nevertheless, couldn't it be an option to have both within Orbit? From
>> a (simrel) participant client's perspective this could make things
>> easier (but probably only if these bundle would then also be provided
>> by some +0 component).
>>
>>>
>>> Tom
>>
>> Cheers
>> Alexander
>>
>>>
>>> [1]http://git.eclipse.org/c/efxclipse/org.eclipse.efxclipse.git/tree/bundles/runtime/org.eclipse.fx.osgi/src/org/eclipse/fx/osgi/fxloader/FXClassLoader.java
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
>>> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> <mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
>>> unsubscribe from this list, visit
>>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Alexander Nyßen
>> Dipl.-Inform.
>> Software-Engineer
>>
>> Telefon: +49 (0) 231 / 98 60-210
>> Telefax: +49 (0) 231 / 98 60-211
>> Mobil: +49 (0) 151 /  17396743
>>
>> http://www.itemis.de <http://www.itemis.de/>
>> alexander.nyssen@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:alexander.nyssen@xxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> itemis AG
>> Am Brambusch 15-24
>> 44536 Lünen
>>
>> Rechtlicher Hinweis:
>>
>> Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 20621
>>
>> Vorstand: Jens Wagener (Vors.), Wolfgang Neuhaus, Dr. Georg Pietrek,
>> Jens Trompeter, Sebastian Neus
>>
>> Aufsichtsrat: Dr. Burkhard Igel (Vors.), Stephan Grollmann, Michael
>> Neuhaus
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
>> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> <mailto:cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
>> unsubscribe from this list, visit
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>
> --
> Dr. Alexander Nyßen
> Dipl.-Inform.
> Software-Engineer
>
> Telefon: +49 (0) 231 / 98 60-210
> Telefax: +49 (0) 231 / 98 60-211
> Mobil: +49 (0) 151 /  17396743
>
> http://www.itemis.de
> alexander.nyssen@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:alexander.nyssen@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> itemis AG
> Am Brambusch 15-24
> 44536 Lünen
>
> Rechtlicher Hinweis:
>
> Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 20621
>
> Vorstand: Jens Wagener (Vors.), Wolfgang Neuhaus, Dr. Georg Pietrek,
> Jens Trompeter, Sebastian Neus
>
> Aufsichtsrat: Dr. Burkhard Igel (Vors.), Stephan Grollmann, Michael Neuhaus
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
> cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
>

_______________________________________________
cross-project-issues-dev mailing list
cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev