Confused about status of JFX+JRE cobundling

Tom Schindl tom.schindl at
Tue Jun 19 00:15:58 PDT 2012

While there are benefits there are also drawbacks:

* JavaFX release schedule has to be tightly aligned with JDK which
  means JavaFX has not much freedom anymore

* the unbalanced decision to not provide SDK-Drops as zips makes
  repackaging for different platforms complex

* the not shipping of sources nor javadoc with JDK cobundle is an even
  bigger problem than locating javafx in dedicated locations or give
  the IDE user a configuration option to locate it on the filesystem
  => don't develop JavaFX applications if you are behind a firewall,
     proxy, train ride... which doesn't give you webaccess
     have a "fun time" developing JavaFX apps and will blame their
     freaking IDE does not give them appropriate proposals
  => will be fixed with JDK-8 / JavaFX 3.0 (see other thread I started
     yesterday) but seriously do we really think this is a wise

* there is now a missmatch between those not wanting to install a JDK
  update and use the JavaFX-SDK because native packaging with
  fx:deploy task is not working for them. Is it really such a big
  problem to find out java.home for the ant-task and packaging this up?
  Just asking

Most of those drawbacks are a result of this co-bundle is the future but
somehow people forget about the present. You are trading your current
developer experience against the one of the future.


Am 19.06.12 07:30, schrieb Igor Nekrestyanov:
> On 6/18/12 10:23 PM, Daniel Zwolenski wrote:
>> Yep, that clears things up, thanks!
>>       * In 7u6 JavaFX will not be automatically added to classpath
>>     (neither for javac not java launcher).
>> I don't understand this though. Why is it not added, and what
>> advantage is there at all to co-bundling if JFX is not on the classpath?
> This is current limitation.
> It had been discussed for a while and various concerns had been raised
> as this impacts all existing apps and not just javafx apps
> (security, compatibility, etc.). Hopefully this will be addressed in one
> of future releases.
> This is not the only jar in the JRE that is not on the bootclasspath.
> E.g. none of deployment jars are ...
> To me biggest benefits are:
>    * JavaFX effectively be preinstalled on most of the systems that have
> Java
>    * No separate installation => fewer problems due to installer bugs &&
> issues caused by Java/JavaFX mix&match
>    * SDK is bundled => much easier for IDEs to support JavaFX development
>    * Easier to build native bundles -- in the current implementation
> runtime is defined by JDK being used
>    * no need in separate Maven module for JavaFX :)
> List is not complete, these are just few top of my head and seems
> important to me,
> -igor

B e s t S o l u t i o n . a t                        EDV Systemhaus GmbH
tom schindl                 geschäftsführer/CEO
eduard-bodem-gasse 5-7/1   A-6020 innsbruck     fax      ++43 512 935833                      phone    ++43 512 935834

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list