On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > At this point, I think we have three significant issues in the release. > > 1. Folks using ResourceModules via flashvars will get exceptions. The > population affected is small, but enough folks use them that already two > folks on our dev list have said they are affected. > 2. The default template for new projects in Flash Builder is incorrect. > This gives a bad first impression on new users. > 3. LCDS customers will receive verify errors when using mx.data.DataItem > and users with custom IList implementations will need to upgrade their > implementations. The population of LCDS customers is also small, but many > of them are the big enterprises and we don't want to give them a reason > not to move to Apache Flex. > > For #1: I have a fix ready to go. It passed all mustella tests. > For #3: I think we should just revert the change to IList. No need to > force IList implementations to implement this method. I cannot figure out > how the customer that brought up this issue got around it. I suppose we > could ship our own version of DataItem, but I'd rather not and I think > that requires going through a donation process. > +1 to reverting the change. There could be thirdparty components for which the source code may not be readily accessible. This could be a big problem. > > For #2: The FB code is assuming that versions in flex-sdk-description.xml > are single digits, so 4.9 parses but 4.10 does not. I'm not sure there is > a way for us to hack FB with a patch, and I don't imagine I can get Adobe > to respond in the timeframe we want. What would be the negative impact of > just lying about the version in flex-sdk-description.xml? We could also > rename the release to 4.9.5 or even go to 5.0.0. > The other option would be to ship as 4.10.0 and add a note about it in our RELEASE_NOTES. The workaround is simple enough. Another reason is I am very curious to see how Adobe reacts to this. I imagine that this would be a simple enough patch for them to release as well. If Adobe does not react quickly enough after the release, we can release a 4.10.1 patch that can just lie about the version in the flex-sdk-description.xml. What are the repurcussions to this? Thanks, Om > > I think we need to resolve all three issues before we really push out > these bits. > > Thoughts? > > -Alex > >
