https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801580 --- Comment #12 from jiri vanek <jvanek@xxxxxxxxxx> --- > > For the coexistence, you are right: openjfx is only for jdk8. openjfx > (JavaFX) is included into JDK8 but compiled separately into two projects: > openjdk and openjfx. That's why there is a subpackage with only symlinks. > Since Java 9 (or 10) openjfx is a separated library. No need to create > symlinks. Good. thanx! > > openjdk-8 and openjdk-11 are long term support. That's why I would like to > maintain openjfx libraries for those two JDKs. When the next LTS openjdk > will released (openjdk-14) I think a new package could be created. For the nope, openjdk 17 is next LTS > intermediate openjdk, I could create a openjfx-latest package? openjfx N > runs on openjdk N-1 (dixit Johan Vos openjfx co-lead at JFX Days in Zurich > last december) Is the depndence really so strict? Hard to belive... If not, I would vote for: renaming current openjfx to openjfx8 made this package "openjfx" requiring java >= 11 Where the target jdk will be te highest LTS (11 for now) and latest STS(14 in few weeks). To have it aligned as you are suggesting ojdk 8,11 and latest x openjfx 8,11, lates is kind offer, but may be very very confusing. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
