So Parsley could find a new home here as well?
Am 01.06.2013 18:54, schrieb Erik de Bruin: > The way we voted to include Swiz will be applied to any other > framework if/when those are donated as well. > > The fact that Swiz gets a home at Apache Flex doesn't mean it will be > endorsed as the one and only option. People get to chose what they > want to use - the SDK isn't and won't be tied to any framework - and > if they chose to use Swiz, they can find it at Apache Flex. That's it. > > EdB > > > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Igor Costa <igorco...@gmail.com> wrote: >> A year back, someone at Flex Brazil group asked me why we couldn't simple >> have a MVC approach into the SDK. >> >> My short answer was We prefer you decide which way you want to code, rather >> than force you on our perspective way. >> >> For mature and freedom of choice we should not have such only a way of >> coding, like explicit someone to code on that specific way. >> >> We have a plethora of Flex frameworks out there, if we include one, we >> should include all of it. >> >> For the freedom of choice that's why I voted -1. >> >> >> >> >> ---------------------------- >> Igor Costa >> www.igorcosta.com >> www.igorcosta.org >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> wrote: >> >>> I think this is a valid vote and there is no need to declare it >>> invalid. There is only one definite, binding -1 (Igor) and he declined >>> to explain his motivation, something that is customary when casting a >>> negative vote. >>> >>> Once Chris Scott 'officially' donates Swiz - there are some hoops he >>> has to jump through, but we'll get to those when he contacts us- we >>> can create a new repo for it: either a general 'flex-contrib/swiz' or >>> a specific one, like 'flex-swiz', we need to discuss that a bit more, >>> I think. >>> >>> Thank you Carlos for managing the vote and keeping track of this donation. >>> >>> EdB >>> > > >
