Josh, these two projects are basically ONLY made out of layered
painters, so I know what I am talking about when I say that painters
are super great, but they need to be reasonably powerful to be of any
value. It would be fun to know who yanked out the guts of them and
what "real" experience they have programming with painters (we are not
talking demos here...).
On Nov 24, 9:39 pm, Joshua Marinacci <jos...@gmail.com
> As I have stated several times before: I did not and will not remove
> the painter api.
> Please read the entire email thread. What I *did* do is refactor the
> painter api to be simpler and recommend takeing other approaches for
> particular use cases. We had the choice between continuing to search
> for a complete solution that would take a long time and still might
> not exist, or ship something more limited that works today. We opted
> for the latter.
> I still would like a more powerful system but the JXLayer project has
> proven to be a better approach to the the problem.
> - Josh, on the go
> On Nov 24, 2008, at 8:26 AM, robeden <robed...@gmail.com
> > Guys -
> > I love the show. One comment though, on the SwingX and Painter stuff,
> > it's pretty clear that you're not familiar with the issues. You might
> > want to research them or get someone one who does understand before
> > you talk about them in depth.
> > Dick, the issue with the painters is that they *did* happen. The
> > community did go out and get them done and put into the SwingX
> > project. The decision was then made by Sun (who controls SwingX) to
> > yank them out. This was done after quite a while (at least a year, I
> > believe) and quite a lot of community input and excitement about the
> > feature. Here's Josh's announcement of the removal:
. To quote Krill
> > Grouchnikov: "This has effectively destroyed the trust of external
> > contributors, who never came back, even after Sun developers have
> > retired themselves from being involved in the project." (Reference: