--- Comment #21 from Nicolas De Amicis <deamicis(a)bluewin.ch> ---
(In reply to jiri vanek from comment #20)
(In reply to Nicolas De Amicis from comment #18)
> (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #16)
> > (In reply to Mario Torre from comment #15)
> > > (In reply to jiri vanek from comment #14)
> > > > thank you, Do you mind to elaborate on: "openjfx N runs on
openjdk N-1 " it
> > > > is very hard to accept:(
> > >
> > > My understanding is that the N here refers to the latest LTS and is the
> > > minimal version it runs on. This means for example that current OpenJFX
runs
> > > on 11+, once the next LTS will be released, assuming for example this to
be
> > > OpenJDK 17, OpenJFX will only run on 17+.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Mario
> >
> > Nicolas, what Mario says leads us to rename of openjx to openjfx8 requiring
> > java <= 1.8.0 and this one to openjfx rewuiring java >=11 as is common
for
> > compact packages. WDYT?
>
> I agree with that.
>
> I must to rename openjfx in openjfx8 but for which versions? F30, F31 and
> F32? Currently the F32 version is in FTBFS
>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1799832. I need to use maven
> instead of gradle.
> I must make a new package review for this package (renamed from openjfx-11
> to openjfx)?
That is moving us to utterly different workflow...
Afaik you can bump your openjfx pkg to sources from this review in
rawhide, and I have to adapt java-1.8.0-openjdk-fx packages to require
javafx-8
In meantime you can start review of openjfx8, as new, compact package. Which
openjdk8-fx will later depend on. If you fail to fix the FTBS, then it is on
to yu to drop it. It happens. I will then just remove openjfx binding from
openjdk8.
This sounds like rawhide only for a while, and backporting should be slow,
although to have it in f32 would be useful and nice, I dont think we are
meting deadlines, as this is in fact at least self-contained chnage.
Still, wdyt?
I really would like to have wider audience on this:(
Sorry, correct me if I misunderstood: I commit into package openjfx the code
from this review (openjfx 11) in rawhide. In meantime I fix the FTBFS of the
package openjfx (openjfx 8) in F32. Finally, I make a package review for a new
openjfx8 package and I merge into the code for openjfx 8 and you drive the
modifications needed for java-1.8.0-openjdk-openjfx?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component