[Bug 1801580] Review Request: openjfx-11 - Rich client application platform for Java

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801580



--- Comment #20 from jiri vanek <jvanek@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Nicolas De Amicis from comment #18)
> (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Mario Torre from comment #15)
> > > (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #14)
> > > > thank you, Do you mind to elaborate on:  "openjfx N runs on openjdk N-1 " it
> > > > is very hard to accept:(
> > > 
> > > My understanding is that the N here refers to the latest LTS and is the
> > > minimal version it runs on. This means for example that current OpenJFX runs
> > > on 11+, once the next LTS will be released, assuming for example this to be
> > > OpenJDK 17, OpenJFX will only run on 17+.
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > Mario
> > 
> > Nicolas, what Mario says leads us to rename of openjx to openjfx8 requiring
> > java <= 1.8.0 and this one to openjfx rewuiring java >=11 as is common for
> > compact packages. WDYT?
> 
> I agree with that. 
> 
> I must to rename openjfx in openjfx8 but for which versions? F30, F31 and
> F32? Currently the F32 version is in FTBFS
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1799832. I need to use maven
> instead of gradle.
> I must make a new package review for this package (renamed from openjfx-11
> to openjfx)?

That is moving us to utterly different workflow...
Afaik you  can  bump your openjfx pkg to sources from this review in rawhide,
and I have to adapt java-1.8.0-openjdk-fx packages to require javafx-8
In meantime you can start review of openjfx8, as new, compact package. Which
openjdk8-fx will later depend on. If you fail to fix the FTBS, then it is on to
yu to drop it. It happens. I will then just remove openjfx binding from
openjdk8. 
This sounds like rawhide only for a while, and backporting should be slow,
although to have it in f32 would be useful and nice, I dont think we are meting
deadlines, as this is in fact at least self-contained chnage.

Still, wdyt?
I really would like to have wider audience on this:(

-- 
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




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux