https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1801580 --- Comment #21 from Nicolas De Amicis <deamicis@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #20) > (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:( Sorry, correct me if I misunderstood: I commit into package openjfx the code from this review (openjfx 11) in rawhide. In meantime I fix the FTBFS of the package openjfx (openjfx 8) in F32. Finally, I make a package review for a new openjfx8 package and I merge into the code for openjfx 8 and you drive the modifications needed for java-1.8.0-openjdk-openjfx? -- 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
