Feature/rework codesigning for mac

fvarrui / JavaPackager

:package: Gradle/Maven plugin to package Java applications as native Windows, MacOS, or Linux executables and create installers for them.

GNU General Public License v3.0

1.07k stars 133 forks source link

Feature/rework codesigning for mac #290

Closed kerner1000 closed 1 year ago

kerner1000 commented 1 year ago

Dear Sirs, I moved the code signing to a dedicated library, which is already available on Maven Central. Please have a look and merge. Next feature is notarisation, which depends on this changes. How is release of 1.7.0 going?

fvarrui commented 1 year ago

How is release of 1.7.0 going?

I'm afraid the release of 1.7.0 will be delayed, but we can release 1.6.8 with what's currently there, what do you think?

kerner1000 commented 1 year ago

Sure, why not? I think there speaks nothing against it if you make a release from the current state of devel. I just brought another project to maven central, so if you need input on releasing, let me know, we can have a chat :)

kerner1000 commented 1 year ago

If it breaks backwards compatibility the new release should be 1.7.0. but the current 1.7.0 can be as well 1.8.0 or 1.7.1, it really doesn't matter, does it?

fvarrui commented 1 year ago

I'm trying to follow (more or less) semantic versioning, so given a version number X.Y.Z, increment the:

X when we make changes that break the backward compatibility
Y when we add new features in a backwards compatible manner
Z when we add patches
Additional label "SNAPSHOT" when it's a pre-release version.

Actually, the next version to release should be 1.7.0, since new features have been added, but I planned to add support for Java Modules in 1.7.0, and I haven't been able to complete it yet 😞

kerner1000 commented 1 year ago

Understood, that makes sense! But why needs the Java Modules be version 1.7.0? Can you not change it to 1.8.0? Anyways, what needs to be done to enable Modules? I am working on it right now, since a non-modular layout seems to make problems with JavaFX. So far, I found a way to do it with minimal changes. But I figured it would be maybe useful to do the packaging with jpackage, what do you think about this? Maybe you could enable "discussions" on this repo so we have place for general discussions?

fvarrui commented 1 year ago

But why needs the Java Modules be version 1.7.0? Can you not change it to 1.8.0?

Just because I'm a stubborn 😄 ... there's no other reason

Anyways, what needs to be done to enable Modules?

I think it would help improve custom JRE generation among other things.

I am working on it right now, since a non-modular layout seems to make problems with JavaFX. So far, I found a way to do it with minimal changes.

I've managed to run a modular Java app on Windows (just passing some VM arguments to Launch4j EXE) with success and I think it should be easy on Linux and MacOS, but not tried yet.

But I figured it would be maybe useful to do the packaging with jpackage, what do you think about this? Maybe you could enable "discussions" on this repo so we have place for general discussions?

Yes, this was proposed some time ago, but it remains to be seen if it covers all the functionality that JavaPackager offers. It's a great idea to open a discussion about it!

fvarrui commented 1 year ago

jpackage discussion 😅