On Fri, 28 Feb 2025 15:56:19 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <k...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> This PR adds the release notes for the JavaFX 24 release. This will first go >> into master, and then be backported to the jfx24 branch so it will be >> available in that branch when JavaFX 24 is published (and from there also >> synced into the jfx24u repo). >> >> The following filter was used to produce the list of issues fixed in JavaFX >> 24: >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.org/issues/?filter=46704 >> >> Additionally, we had seven issues with a release-note=yes label, which are >> included in the list of important changes, etc (one of them is still pending >> the text for the release note). > > Kevin Rushforth has updated the pull request incrementally with one > additional commit since the last revision: > > JDK-8340852-info.md --> JDK-8340852-ScrollPane.md doc-files/notes/24/JDK-8340852-ScrollPane.md line 7: > 5: The fix for [JDK-8340852](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8340852) > changed the behavior of `ScrollPane`. With the latest update, `ScrollPane` > only responds to keyboard navigation when it is the focused node. If you > prefer the previous behavior, where `ScrollPane` always reacts to arrow keys > and other navigational inputs, you can manually restore it by adding an event > handler: > 6: > 7: ``` Syntax highlighting: Suggestion: doc-files/notes/24/JDK-8340852-ScrollPane.md line 31: > 29: ``` > 30: Using this helper method to convert scroll fractions to values for the > scrollbars, and set them: > 31: ``` Suggestion: doc-files/notes/24/JDK-8340852-ScrollPane.md line 54: > 52: } > 53: ``` > 54: Adding this event handler will make ScrollPane react to navigation keys > as it did before the update. Suggestion: Adding this event handler will make `ScrollPane` react to navigation keys as it did before the update. doc-files/release-notes-24.md line 70: > 68: JavaFX 24 supports the Java Image I/O API, allowing applications to use > third-party image loaders in addition to the built-in image loaders. This > includes the ability to use variable-density image loaders for formats like > SVG. When an image is loaded using a variable-density image loader, JavaFX > rasterizes the image with the screen's DPI scaling. > 69: > 70: Applications that want to use this feature can use existing open-source > Image I/O extension libraries, or register a custom Image I/O service > provider instance with the IIORegistry class. Refer to the Java Image I/O > documentation for more information. "Refer to the Java Image I/O documentation for more information." Perhaps give a link to the Image I/O documentation? doc-files/release-notes-24.md line 134: > 132: [JDK-8343398](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8343398) | Add > reducedData preference | graphics > 133: [JDK-8345188](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8345188) | Support > tree-structural pseudo-classes | scenegraph > 134: Should we give a link to https://openjfx.io/javadoc/24/new-list.html to easily see new API (when the docs are published)? Maybe even to https://openjfx.io/javadoc/24/deprecated-list.html. doc-files/release-notes-24.md line 191: > 189: [JDK-8338701](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8338701) | Provide > media support for libavcodec version 61 | media > 190: [JDK-8346228](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346228) | Update > GStreamer to 1.24.10 | media > 191: [JDK-8346229](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346229) | Update Glib > to 2.82.4 | media I'm not sure it's beneficial to include obsolete version updates. If the final update of a dependency is to 1.2.3, then any previous update (1.2.1) doesn't need to be listed, in my opinion. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1712#discussion_r1979919965 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1712#discussion_r1979920275 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1712#discussion_r1979921855 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1712#discussion_r1979912329 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1712#discussion_r1979951972 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1712#discussion_r1979985574
