> This PR removes support for running JavaFX applications with the Java
> Security Manager.
>
> The initial work was done in 4 separate commits as follows:
>
> * Fail fast at startup if the Security Manager is enabled
> * Remove `-Djava.security.manager` and all security policy files; delete
>
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 17:29:30 GMT, Nir Lisker wrote:
> It is at all possible to split the image loaders from the desktop module into
> its own? I would think it will be useful for more than just JavaFX.
That would still be dependent on the desktop module, so I don't see how that
would help any
On Tue, 15 Oct 2024 20:08:31 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
> Any idea why FX has custom image loaders at all, and doesn't simply always
> delegate to `ImageIO` for this? If the dependency burden is high, it could be
> further reduced by removing built-in decoders? In other words, what's the
> adva
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 19:19:02 GMT, Michael Strauß wrote:
>> This PR is an improved version of #1093.
>>
>> JavaFX can load BMP, GIF, PNG, and JPEG images with its built-in image
>> loaders. It has been a long-standing request to support more image formats,
>> most notably (but not limited to) S
> This PR is an improved version of #1093.
>
> JavaFX can load BMP, GIF, PNG, and JPEG images with its built-in image
> loaders. It has been a long-standing request to support more image formats,
> most notably (but not limited to) SVG. However, adding more built-in image
> loaders is a signifi
> This PR is an improved version of #1093.
>
> JavaFX can load BMP, GIF, PNG, and JPEG images with its built-in image
> loaders. It has been a long-standing request to support more image formats,
> most notably (but not limited to) SVG. However, adding more built-in image
> loaders is a signifi
> Add the `jdk.jsobject` module to JavaFX. This module is currently delivered
> by the JDK, but will be terminally-deprecated in JDK 24 by
> [JDK-8311530](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8311530), which is out for
> review at openjdk/jdk#20555. We therefore plan to start delivering it with
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 21:46:21 GMT, Michael Strauß wrote:
> Backgrounds and borders are comprised of immutable and final types. The
> following types are marked with the `final` modifier:
>
> * Background
> * BackgroundFill
> * BackgroundImage
> * BackgroundSize
> * Border
> * BorderWidths
>
> Th
Hi Lukasz,
Yes, FFM is quite a bit to take in. I haven't mastered the newest version
myself yet.
In many cases I mostly followed D3D9 backend's design, so the similarities
> can be there. =) But there definitely is room for improvement which I also
> see and would like to tackle before the backen
Removed "not yet fully implemented" USE_MULTIPLE_NODES and related code.
I would like to remove the early unfinished idea of using multiple Text nodes
in TextAreaSkin to clean up the code, to make it easier to do fixes for
[JDK-8342233](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8342233) and
[JDK-8296
Hi Nir,
Thanks for suggestions! Apologies for being a bit late, needed to wrap my head
around FFM before responding.
In many cases I mostly followed D3D9 backend's design, so the similarities can
be there. =) But there definitely is room for improvement which I also see and
would like to tackl
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:06:39 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>> I would say so, yes. If the user specifies any `@Nx`, then we only look for
>> this particular version.
>
> Probably, but this is out of scope for this PR / JBS bug. Please file a
> follow-up bug.
Filed [JDK-8342530](https://bugs.open
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 05:58:31 GMT, Ambarish Rapte wrote:
> Update Copyright year in these 3 doc files to 2025.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: c4b1e1c0
Author:Ambarish Rapte
URL:
https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/commit/c4b1e1c019c98e97c64df8b11ee2f9635c67256d
Stats:
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:22:09 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
> The description of the issue
> [JDK-8341686](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8341686) mentions also "We
> need to update the copyright year in docs and README files for openjfx22 to
> 2024."
>
> @arapte Can you fix this copy/paste
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:11:19 GMT, danielpeintner wrote:
> I don't wanna bother you but I am surprised to see 2025 given we are still in
> 2024.
The release of JavaFX 24 will be in March of 2025. We do this every October.
The description of the issue
[JDK-8341686](https://bugs.openjdk.org/brow
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 05:58:31 GMT, Ambarish Rapte wrote:
> Update Copyright year in these 3 doc files to 2025.
I don't wanna bother you but I am surprised to see 2025 given we are still in
2024.
The description of the issue
[JDK-8341686](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8341686) mentions als
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 11:44:33 GMT, Michael Strauß wrote:
>> This technically translates to the for-loop higher up that tries to fetch
>> other scaled versions of an image - if you want to explicitly load
>> `f...@1x.png` it will look for `foo@1...@2x.png` etc.
>>
>> Should we just assume that w
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 05:58:31 GMT, Ambarish Rapte wrote:
> Update Copyright year in these 3 doc files to 2025.
LGTM
No need to wait 24 hours for this simple copyright year change.
-
Marked as reviewed by kcr (Lead).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1602#pullrequestrevie
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 07:43:28 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan
wrote:
> SwingNodePlatformExitCrashTest lists
> [JDK-8190329](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8190329) as the reason it
> is skipped. However, the correct bug ID is the newly filed
> [JDK-8340849](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-834
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 11:23:06 GMT, Lukasz Kostyra wrote:
>> modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/java/com/sun/javafx/iio/ImageStorage.java
>> line 392:
>>
>>> 390: try {
>>> 391: // last fallback, try to see if the file
>>> exists with @1x suffix
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 07:43:28 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan
wrote:
> SwingNodePlatformExitCrashTest lists
> [JDK-8190329](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8190329) as the reason it
> is skipped. However, the correct bug ID is the newly filed
> [JDK-8340849](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-834
On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 13:08:57 GMT, John Hendrikx wrote:
>> Lukasz Kostyra has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Review fixes
>>
>> - Change exception message in loadAll() to include original resource
>> path
>> - Add
SwingNodePlatformExitCrashTest lists
[JDK-8190329](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8190329) as the reason it is
skipped. However, the correct bug ID is the newly filed
[JDK-8340849](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8340849)
-
Commit messages:
- 8340850: Wrong bug ID listed
23 matches
Mail list logo
