JavaFX 11 maven snapshots - empty jars

Kevin Rushforth kevin.rushforth at
Fri Jul 13 14:59:47 UTC 2018

Would it help Eclipse if instead of an empty jar, the jar contained just 
the module-info.class file? Or will that then cause problems because of 
two .jar files with the same module name?

-- Kevin

On 7/13/2018 7:37 AM, Johan Vos wrote:
> Hi Steve,
> Yes, that has been considered, but I'm more than happy to re-open the
> discussion.
> The problem with javafx-controls-${javafx.platform} as the artifactId is
> that in that case, the gradle developer is in all cases required to add the
> platform suffix to the dependency, which makes it very hard to manage
> JavaFX projects via version control, as the dependency file will hard-code
> contain e.g. javafx-controls-linux, where other developers would use
> javafx-controls-windows
> - Johan
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 4:30 PM Steve Hruda <steve.hruda at> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Johan asked me to move the empty jar discussion to the mailing list.
>> As I mentioned at GitHub, we did some tests with the published SNAPSHOT's
>> and we had to force an exclude of the empty jars at the dependecies.
>> Otherwise e.g. Eclipse shows a warning that the module name is instable
>> because of the "auto-generated" module name in case of the empty jars.
>> Thanks at Joeri for explaining the reason. I understand now the reason for
>> the empty jar.
>> I never tried it and I know that it doesn't fit to the familar handling of
>> platform dependent jars...
>> Have you thought about it to use the platform variable at the artifactId?
>> Something like:
>> <artifactId>javafx-controls-${javafx.platform}</artifactId>
>> Best Regards,
>> Steve

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list