How does JFX work get prioritised?

Kevin Rushforth kevin.rushforth at
Mon Oct 29 17:41:04 PDT 2012

Richard Bair should answer the more general question you raised.

-- Kevin

Daniel Zwolenski wrote:
> Good to know, but I was just using this issue to frame the question: 
> what's the process you use to determine what's in or out? When you 
> "reconsider" this, who will be doing the reconsidering, and what will 
> be the determining factor of whether it is in or out?
> e.g. is each developer or sub-team free to pick their priorities or do 
> they come from a marketing team or a high-level management crew? Maybe 
> there's a committee that meets once a week, month, whatever? What 
> input do the decision makers look at when deciding, are they using 
> solid metrics from market research, surveys, community feedback, etc, 
> or is it more of a gut-feel thing? 
> You mention "lobbying". What form of lobbying? What priority do JIRA 
> votes get (traditionally none) vs "private emails", OTN forum posts, 
> or feet stamping and generally being annoying on this mailing list 
> (that hasn't worked for me though ;) ). Does lobbying from certain 
> users (e.g. oracle customers) or types of users (e.g. 
> established corporates vs "I'm a developer") get more weight than 
> others - if so what's the weighting (how many noisy plebs does it take 
> to balance out large corporate)? 
> Any chance we could get some insight on any of that? 
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Kevin Rushforth 
> <kevin.rushforth at <mailto:kevin.rushforth at>> wrote:
>     I'll take the heat for this one. I just bulk removed the "Lombard"
>     release for all Feature JIRAs (as opposed to Tweaks) that are not
>     part of the list of accepted features for the release, without too
>     much thought behind it. One reason for doing this is to not leave
>     the false impression that they are being actively worked on, so
>     that people can either set their expectations appropriately or
>     lobby for it being included.
>     Based on your e-mail, the number of votes on this issue, and a
>     couple private e-mails I received, it seems like this is something
>     we should explicitly reconsider.
>     -- Kevin
>     Daniel Zwolenski wrote:
>         Is it possible for someone from the Oracle JFX team to outline
>         how features
>         get prioritised for inclusion in a release?
>         I've been frustrated at times with things I think I are
>         important not
>         getting done, and I think a few others have had similar
>         experiences. Obviously all of us think our bug/feature is the most
>         important thing, and not everything can get done and there has
>         to be
>         priorities. I think it would be less frustrating though if we
>         actually knew
>         the process that was used to prioritise issues - who decides,
>         and what
>         metrics are used as input?
>         I noted today for example, that
>         RT-10376<>,
>         which is simply to allow maximising the stage
>         programmatically, just got
>         bumped so its not part of Java8 and is not part of any foreseeable
>         release. I personally don't care about this feature so much,
>         but it does
>         look like a pretty fundamental, basic thing for a windowing
>         toolkit to
>         have, so highlights the general point:
>            - It was raised as a "critical feature" by Jasper Potts, so
>         it doesn't
>            seem a case of not being recognised as important within Oracle.
>            - It was raised back in 2010 so it doesn't seem a case of
>         it coming in
>            too late and just not making the cut for the release.
>            - Based on comments from Anthony Petrov it seems to be
>         already mostly
>            implemented and just needs to be hooked in, so I'm assuming
>         it's not really
>            a big resourcing issue.
>            - It's got 28 votes from the community, placing it at #8 in
>         the most
>            voted list by my reckoning, so there's no lack of community
>         interest in the
>            issue (3D geometry support has 12 votes for example).
>         >From my vantage point, it's difficult to see why a feature
>         like this
>         wouldn't have been done months ago, let alone be off the road map
>         completely, especially when you consider some of the more
>         obscure features
>         on the roadmap. Confusion over something like this, for me at
>         least,
>         festers into a general distrust in the process, which results in
>         frustration around other issues I do consider important (like
>         build/deployment).
>         Can this confusion be lessened through some better
>         communication? Is it
>         possible to explain how, in this case and in general, you guys
>         prioritise
>         JavaFX work?

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list