>I'm sure some users will be very happy if you do that. You don't have to, you >just have to judge how many people will be impacted and whether it will cause >them to think poorly of >Apache Flex.
I have no idea how many people will be using sub-classing for CalloutSkin (like in the mustella test), so I took the most pessimistic assumption and kept full backward compatibility: - Old behavior: if calloutSkin is subclassed, and borderThickness & borderColor are overridden => use these values - New behavior: otherwise, use matching css styles. - reverted mustella CalloutSkin test to use the old behavior (overridden values). - arrow will also use the same behavior for borderThickness and borderColor (wasn't before). Mustell mobile/SplittedViewNavigator test passes. I have committed to origin/develop Maurice -----Message d'origine----- De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : jeudi 10 octobre 2013 18:12 À : Maurice Amsellem; dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_mustella #460 (fixed) On 10/10/13 8:58 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <maurice.amsel...@systar.com> wrote: >I get it. > >So I will try to change the code so that it supports both the old >behavior (ie by subclassing) and new behavior (ie by styling). I'm sure some users will be very happy if you do that. You don't have to, you just have to judge how many people will be impacted and whether it will cause them to think poorly of Apache Flex. For example, for the FTETextField issue, we may decide that the FTETextField has always been behaving incorrectly and change the tests and tell folks they'll have to change any code affected by it because they were relying on buggy behavior. We will use performance considerations in that decision because there are often hundreds of FTETextFields on screen at once, whereas SplitViewNavigator probably only has a few. Thanks, Alex
