Is JavaFX going to truly be a community project?

Michael Ennen mike.ennen at
Sat Sep 1 18:59:45 UTC 2018

This is one of the reasons I pushed (along with other's) to open a Github
repository. Making it so that the work we do there transfers over to master
easier is something that is on-going.

I implemented the support for Travis CI and Appveyor so that if you open
a pull-request on the openjdk-jfx Github repository you can see test results
for Mac, Windows, and Linux. You can even run a temporary "FULL_TEST"
by adding a temporary commit (that would be removed when the PR is
merged) that adds `-PFULL_TEST=true`, `-PUSE_ROBOT=true`, to
"tools\scripts\build.ps1" for Windows and ".ci\" for Linux and

There were some questions about checking if the JavaFX tutorials could be
re-licensed under a FOSS license. If that becomes a reality we could either
add them to the openjdk-jfx repository, create an orphan branch for them,
or add them to an additional repository that is linked to in the README.

JavaFX has technically been open for quite some time. Making it so
others can join in and add their contributions has been part of my focus
for a bit now, and things are getting better incrementally in that regard.

I opened a pull-request to move the JavaFX Robot API from private API
to public API, and with the help of Kevin Rushforth that was stewarded into
the latest JavaFX releases. That's one example from me, personally. I
hope we can continue to add/improve features to JavaFX, even if there
was a different or simply more stewards.

Michael Ennen

On Sat, Sep 1, 2018 at 5:01 AM Pedro Duque Vieira <
pedro.duquevieira at> wrote:

> Hi,
> For JavaFX to start being, truly, a community project it is important that
> it is perceived as a real community effort. Right now it's starting to look
> more like it's changing hands, from being an Oracle project to being a
> Gluon project.
> I don't have anything against Gluon, I'd say the same if for instance,
> instead of Gluon it was JPro or Karakun, or whatever...
> Hosting the JavaFX docs, builds, installations, etc on a company owned site
> or a company endorsed site sounds like a really bad idea. Which is what's
> happening right now. If it's to be a community project it should be owned
> by the community as a whole. As well as being perceived to be owned by the
> community as a whole.
> Being a one company project will deter the contributions of other players
> in the JavaFX space. Other players that also offer consultancy services,
> and JavaFX products will have a big disadvantage towards the company
> hosting the JavaFX assets and downloads. At the very minimum think about
> the huge advantage this company will have in publicity when compared to the
> others.
> A community project is a project where various players join efforts to
> mutually benefit each other. As soon as this starts being a project that's
> benefiting one particular company more than the others it ceases to be a
> community project.
> I don't think that anyone would like to join in on the efforts in this
> scenario.
> Thanks,
> --
> Pedro Duque Vieira -

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list