Andres Almiray

I agree with @jidesoft. The behavior provided by `install`/ `uninstall` is not related to JavaFX bindings per-se. Using any form of `bind` / `unbind` would be rather confusing IMHO. Alternative...

Have a look at a sample report for a moderate sized project The following dependencies are using the latest milestone version: - com.github.ben-manes:gradle-versions-plugin:0.15.0 - com.google.code.findbugs:jsr305:3.0.1 - com.google.guava:guava:22.0 - com.h2database:h2:1.4.196 -...

I prefer the `buildscript` block over `plugins` which IMHO is implemented halfway anyway. All this being said, do plugins get listed in the same "block" when you use your style...

@vanniktech sorting dependencies will certainly help, however it does not fix the underlying issue. One thing is to sort dependencies by groupid/artifactid, another is by their responsibilities (build deps vs...

Hi, I just stumbled upon this issue when attempting to run a Griffon application on top of JDK 10. I modified the plugin with a "simple" fix, basically inverting `IS_JAVA_8`...

Is the new plugin already available?

FWIW there's a thread at the OpenJDK mailing list discussing if javafxpackager should be moved to core, thus remaining available to everybody without an additional download, probably renamed (back) to...

Donald Smith blogged at https://blogs.oracle.com/java-platform-group/the-future-of-javafx-and-other-java-client-roadmap-updates while the official white-paper is available at http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/javaclientroadmapupdate2018mar-4414431.pdf Lastly, the proposed JEP to keep javapacker inside core OpenJDK is http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2018-May/053503.html https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8200758

I'll be happy to send a PR with the updates needed for this to happen 😄

FWIW I use ``` plugins { id 'de.benediktritter.maven-plugin-development' version '0.3.1' } ``` And it does create the help mojo.