On 8/7/14 10:42 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >> I'm still unclear why we are trying to release the Flex 3 version >Because initially that's all we had. > >> Will folks really use the Flex 3 version? >I believe so yes, the examples are still useful and not everyone uses or >needs spark components. > OK. I took a quick look. The build script worked. Looks nice with the Apache Flex logo in there, so good job getting this on its feet. Nick did work on this code base before donation. The same isn't true for the Flex 4 version. Some nits: -Do we need a zip package? -Should the package name be more consistent as in: "apache-flex-tour-de-flex-1.0" -I fixed one minor typo in LICENSE "orignal" -I fixed one minor typo in RELEASE_NOTES "inital" -I saw a note in http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html that says: "Many of these licenses have specific attribution terms that need to be adhered to, for example CC-A, often by adding them to the NOTICE file." Makes me think something needs to be added to NOTICE, but I'm not sure what. Some questions: 1) In the build, there are several warnings about deprecated APIs. Also, I noticed the MXML files are using the 2006 namespace. I think you need to use 2009 to ever have it work with Spark components. If you want it to be more Flex 3-ish, I think you might be able to get rid of those warnings by using a compatibility-version flag. If you switch to 2009, you might need to upgrade the examples that use deprecated APIs. What kinds of errors are you getting trying to build the Flex 4 version? I think you might find the examples have already been upgraded. 2) When you view any example, all you see in the source at first is the Apache header. It sure would be nice to simply see the source. Would it make sense to set the scroll position when changing examples? HTH, -Alex
