kevin.rushforth at oracle.com
Tue Sep 4 16:27:06 UTC 2018
On 9/4/2018 6:54 AM, Nir Lisker wrote:
> 1. I would like access, thanks. I'll be able to update the Eclipse
> instructions and some of the Windows build instructions.
You should have access now.
> 2. I submitted https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8210360.
> It's going to take a large effort to go over every page there and see
> what needs changing. If enough people join the task we could (and
> should) have it updated for openjfx12.
I'm not sure that going over every page and suggesting updates would
work well. At least not unless we are able to open-source them (I have
started that conversation internally) and host them somewhere else
(maybe on the Wiki or maybe checked into the openjfx repo or some other
repo). For the pages on the OTN site, the best we can hope for as far as
updating these tutorial pages is to fix or remove anything that is
egregiously wrong (e.g., the SceneBuilder docs), and also have a pointer
to the OpenJFX Project page / Wiki for newer docs -- at least that way
someone who visits that page could find more up-to-date docs.
Btw, since we still support JDK 8u, we can't for example, remove the
Deployment section, so some old / out-of-date docs need to remain.
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 3:49 PM Kevin Rushforth
> <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com <mailto:kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>> wrote:
> 1. The OpenJFX Wiki on openjdk.java.net <http://openjdk.java.net>
> is ideal for maintaining pages
> related to the Project itself. This can be supplemented by other
> As for access, any OpenJFX Project Author (or Committer) can have
> access to the Wiki. Just let me know if you want access, but it isn't
> activated yet.
> 2. This is where the community could really help as noted by Johan
> others. The tutorials are indeed out of date. If you want to file
> a JBS
> bug and assign it to me, I can see what needs to be done to either
> correct (if simple) or archive pages that are so out of date as to be
> useless (or worse, misleading).
> -- Kevin
> On 9/4/2018 1:18 AM, Nir Lisker wrote:
> > 1. Yes. The OpenJFX wiki is editable only by specific people
> (or only
> > Kevin) and it requires a lot of updating. We need either to be
> able to
> > submit changes to it, or to use the GitHub wiki which is
> collaborative by
> > design, in which case we need to hide the OpenJFX wiki to avoid
> > 2. Yes. The tutorials  are slightly outdated (and
> SceneBuilder should
> > disappear from there ASAP and point to Gluon). I don't know who
> > those pages.
> > 3. No. There's not enough traction. Jonathan Giles collects some
> "links of
> > the week" and the semi-zombified /r/JavaFX subreddit is enough
> to indicate
> > that we shouldn't invest yet in this direction.
> >  https://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/javase-clienttechnologies.htm
> > - Nir
> > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 10:02 AM Johan Vos <johan.vos at gluonhq.com
> <mailto:johan.vos at gluonhq.com>> wrote:
> >> It has been mentioned a number of times that JavaFX would
> benefit from a
> >> JavaFX website.
> >> I see a number of options that fall in the category website:
> >> 1. A set of pages with details on what OpenJFX is, how to
> build, where to
> >> download and get release notes, how to contribute, roadmap,...
> That is what
> >> I believe can perfectly be done in the OpenJFX wiki. It can be the
> >> reference manual
> >> 2. A set of pages targeting new and existing JavaFX developers,
> with a
> >> focus on where to download, how to get started
> (maven/gradle/IDE's), where
> >> to get docs/tutorials and probably with some links to third
> party libraries
> >> (free/commercial). This is sort of the user manual.
> >> 3. A highly interactive community site, gathering tweets/blog
> posts etc,
> >> more or less similar to what James Weaver and Gerrit Grunwald
> did years
> >> ago.
> >> For 1: I think this is up to us (OpenJFX committers) to
> maintain and
> >> improve. It will also benefit the people here.
> >> For 2: This is the most important thing, I believe. It would be
> great if a
> >> number of people from this list step up to organize this. It
> can be a
> >> static website, a github page, or anything else. I don't think this
> >> strictly belongs under OpenJFX (which I consider to be the
> >> development umbrella) but it's extremely important to have.
> >> I think this is a perfect opportunity for people and companies
> who want to
> >> get more active in JavaFX to get involved in.
> >> For 3: That would be nice, but I think it's too ambitious for
> now. I would
> >> be happy with a static, simple, clear website.
> >> - Johan
More information about the openjfx-dev