GroovyFX.next

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

GroovyFX.next

Andres Almiray
Hello everyone,

A question for those of you still using GroovyFX or willing to give it a try:

As you may be aware JavaFX8 and JavaFX9 are binary incompatible due to package updates. It's a bit troublesome for library makers to keep a project compatible with JavaFX8 and JavaFX9+ (as a matter of fact I'd Say skip JavaFX9 & 10, use 11 as the base instead as it's LTS).

The question is:
- Do you need JavaFX 8 compatibility? In other words, can you move to JavaFX11 as a minimum?

Cheers,
Andres

-------------------------------------------
Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
http://andresalmiray.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
--
What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GroovyFX.next

paulk_asert
Administrator
Binary compatibility would be the ideal, but failing that, I think we need to find a path forward with some compromises.
A JDK11 minimum but retaining source code compatibility would be the next ideal from my point of view.

Cheers, Paul.

On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 7:04 AM Andres Almiray <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hello everyone,

A question for those of you still using GroovyFX or willing to give it a try:

As you may be aware JavaFX8 and JavaFX9 are binary incompatible due to package updates. It's a bit troublesome for library makers to keep a project compatible with JavaFX8 and JavaFX9+ (as a matter of fact I'd Say skip JavaFX9 & 10, use 11 as the base instead as it's LTS).

The question is:
- Do you need JavaFX 8 compatibility? In other words, can you move to JavaFX11 as a minimum?

Cheers,
Andres

-------------------------------------------
Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
http://andresalmiray.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
--
What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: GroovyFX.next

Sean Gilligan
In reply to this post by Andres Almiray
I'm interested in giving a GroovyFX a fresh look. (I'm especially interested in the possibility of using annotations to generate
JavaFX property methods on POJOs)

JavaFX 11 and later is fine (preferred, in fact.)  I also think it would be preferable to target this to Groovy 4.

-- Sean

On 12/10/20 1:04 PM, Andres Almiray wrote:
Hello everyone,

A question for those of you still using GroovyFX or willing to give it a try:

As you may be aware JavaFX8 and JavaFX9 are binary incompatible due to package updates. It's a bit troublesome for library makers to keep a project compatible with JavaFX8 and JavaFX9+ (as a matter of fact I'd Say skip JavaFX9 & 10, use 11 as the base instead as it's LTS).

The question is:
- Do you need JavaFX 8 compatibility? In other words, can you move to JavaFX11 as a minimum?

Cheers,
Andres

-------------------------------------------
Java Champion; Groovy Enthusiast
http://andresalmiray.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/aalmiray
--
What goes up, must come down. Ask any system administrator.
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.