Draft JEP for new Packaging Tool (replacement for javapackager)
johan.vos at gluonhq.com
Fri Jun 1 17:42:51 UTC 2018
I'm not saying a preloader is really a requirement, but I know of a few
applications that are using it and benefiting from it.
The preloader functionality is more than just a splash screen, and I see
this valuable for instance when static initializers of classes that are
used in the main class may take a lot of time.
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 5:56 PM Scott Palmer <swpalmer at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jun 1, 2018, at 5:01 AM, Tom Schindl <tom.schindl at bestsolution.at>
> > On 01.06.18 08:01, Michael Ennen wrote:
> >> Re-familiarizing myself with what javapackager offers, it seems the
> >> following JavaFX related
> >> features are present:
> >> 1.) The conversion of CSS to binary CSS
> >> 2.) The ability to specify a preloader
> >> 3.) the ability to specify the JavaFX Application class
> >> The first one seems like a bit of feature-creep and could be replaced by
> >> some other build
> >> tool if third party developers really need that feature. They could
> >> probably even use something
> >> like maven-exec-plugin to manually call such a converter. Let's set this
> >> one aside, then.
> >> The second and third one are important for correctly launching a JavaFX
> >> application. I would
> > on 2.: What is a preloader good for if you launch a local application?
> > IMHO it only really made sense for Webstart
> > on 3. Why? All you need to do is to provide a main-method and you are
> > good to go.
> +1, I have only used a main method that simply calls launch(args). I
> never understood why there was a need for special launching of JavaFX apps.
> At one point I thought of using a preloaded for a splash screen because
> sometimes I have an application that needs to initialize a lot of plugins,
> so there is a significant startup time, but it isn’t worth it. The main
> method launches fast enough.
More information about the openjfx-dev