[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [equinox-dev] Simpler JavaFX class loading
- From: Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 17:09:07 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US, en-CA
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Thread-index: AQHPMkTFOOIks6BD80CnHjYfuYo4rprGgKcAgAAEwgD//66ggA==
- Thread-topic: [equinox-dev] Simpler JavaFX class loading
- User-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/220.127.116.11030
a) My focus is actually Mars, Luna for now, not Kepler.
b) I don¹t care much about swt-embedding, I¹m going the other way.
c) Agreed. A FX specific profile makes sense. That requires another
property to ensure it gets loaded, but better than the magic extensions
property. But I haven¹t had much luck getting the profiles to do what I
want anyway. Adding the packages to org.osgi.framework.system.packages
doesn¹t seem to be enough or correct at all.
On 2/25/2014, 12:00 PM, "Tom Schindl" <tom.schindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>a) Simply providing a fragment
>No. The problem is that JavaFX is on the ExtensionClasspath which is
>skipped by default on Equinox - maybe this changes with Luna?
>On Kepler there was an invalid OSGi-Switch who made this possible!
>Search the forum on a discussion how this could work.
>b) SWT-FX integration
>This would still have to be done using the hook because the
>swt-embedding is not on the classpath
>c) putting in the JavaSE1.8 profile sounds wrong - this is not JSRed API
>so if I'd ship an extra profile JavaSE-FX-1.8 which holds the packages.
>Another problem with this is that - believe me - many people have to
>access internal API so if you only export the public one you'll make
>many people not happy.
>On 25.02.14 17:43, Alex Blewitt wrote:
>> Can you not just install a fragment to the system bundle that exports
>>the javafx packages?
>> Sent from my iPhone 5
>>> On 25 Feb 2014, at 16:15, Doug Schaefer <dschaefer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Hey gang,
>>> I¹m aware of the work Tom S has done with class loading hooks to get
>>>JavaFX classes to load. I¹m just wondering if there are easier
>>>approaches we could be following, something we can put in the
>>>JavaSE-1.8.profile file or somewhere else so that we can make this a
>>>more data driven approach. It¹s a pain to have to set the
>>>osgi.framework.extensions property for every product we want to build
>>>with JavaFX support. I¹m aware that not every 1.8 VM will have JavaFX
>>>in it, but for those that do, I¹d love to see this support enabled
>>>automagicly. Any thoughts?
>>> equinox-dev mailing list
>> equinox-dev mailing list
>equinox-dev mailing list