Hi, I am one of the third-parties, the "Ardisia Component Library". Sorry about not responding earlier, I just read the thread.
I am thrilled to be included in the Tour De Flex, so first off thanks for including this new feature. I tried building the TourDeFlex with the nightly build from earlier in the thread but I was hit with 100 or so compiling errors with path errors and pointers to non-existent components like a Spark RichTextEditor so I must be using an incorrect build. However, earlier in this thread OmPrakash posted screenshots of the problem and I looked at the nightly binary build so I have an idea of the layout issues are. I hate to cause all this trouble . Perhaps my page in the Tour De Flex could just be a label and a link? Say something like what I have now, except go ahead and drop the imagehave a single page with a list of third party components arranged in a grid format with a short description of each and a link to the demo. This way, it could be compiled into the app with minimal effort and On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > On 11/7/14, 12:34 AM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > > >So how do we reach consensus on this in a timely way? If the process > >doesn't allow a vote and/or people don't vote it's basically dead in the > >water. I would like to see this released sooner than later and not have > >releases hanging for weeks, not everyone is full time on this project and > >increasing the length of the release process stops people from being able > >to be a release manager. If we had stuck to the official recommend > >process we probably would of released by now. The previous version of > >Tour De Flex had two release candidates and was released in 10 days from > >start of the first RC vote to the final vote result. > > Sometimes, releases get stuck on hard issues discovered late in the game. > It is clear you want to ship as-is, but I think we should make the > third-party content look good. I was hoping the third parties would have > offered their thoughts by now. I’m wondering if they’ve at least tried > the nightly build at [1] and saw how their content appears, because that’s > how it will behave when published to flex.a.o. > > Also, have you investigated the Squiggly issue brought up yesterday [2]? > I also get the exception. It could just be a bug in the CI server setup. > > Both Squiggly and Third Party examples are highlighted in the > RELEASE_NOTES and both are not fully operational. > > > > >It's also curious as to why you only decide to bring this content load > >strategy up now and state it as a blocker for releasing, rather than when > >we we were discussing adding 3rd party support for it several months ago. > > It never crossed my mind until I saw the issue brought up on this thread. > If we had established Jenkins builds sooner, then maybe we would have > found it sooner, because it was only when I saw it that I realized what > was going on, and only after thinking about it more did it occur to me > that we really should get Marshall Plan separation from the third parties. > If we can’t engage them on this sizing/position issue, we probably don’t > want to depend on them staying in sync on SDK versions going forward. > > -Alex > > [1] http://s.apache.org/sC4 > [2] http://s.apache.org/hqe > > -- Jake Knerr - Flex Developer Ardisia Labs www.ardisialabs.com
