Proposal: Deprecate Builders

Richard Bair richard.bair at
Mon Mar 25 13:20:31 PDT 2013

>> This last point likely will be contentious but having these out in
>> something philosophically more like swingx would be better for everyone in
>> my opinion. It's the code the community can and probably want to evolve (as
>> opposed to media, rendering, 3d, etc) and there's no particular benefit to
>> it being in the JRE only costs involved. Doesn't mean Oracle can't
>> sanction/support/manage/contribute, etc.
> In Java 8 the "components" (graphics, base, swing, swt, fxml, media, controls, web) are all going to be separable so that you can run a VM with only a subset of these components. That's already happening.
> Splitting any of these modules out into yet another open source project would have no clear benefits. We already don't have any of the process-imposed burdens of the JDK (such as the JCP process), but still get the benefits (wide distribution). The self-imposed constraints like maintaining compatibility wouldn't be different in an external project as in openjfx -- we would still operate the same. Of course anybody is free to fork and make a better project!

I guess another way to put it is that since the FXML, Controls, etc "components" will be split out and you can chose to include them or not in an application bundle, the fact that we have some built-in controls in the javafx.** space doesn't preclude an independent open source project from providing a completely different set of ui controls. In fact, I think if such a thing happened that would be a great sign in terms of the adoption of the project space. The controls (or charts or XML serialization scheme etc) that we adopted doesn't have to be the only way things are done, and in some cases a specialized controls subset that dealt with platform specific UI for example could be a great thing.


More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list