On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I guess that's an unfortunate naming similarity to Adobe's abandoned > "ActionScript Next". I hadn't even made the association. Regardless, I'm > not concerned with a little temporary disappointment. Doing something like > replacing a name associated with darker times with something fresh and > hopeful is exactly what I intend to do with this project of mine. > ActionScript deserves to evolve with the web, and maybe that even means new > language features, if they're compelling enough. > Not to many people could add features to the compiler but there are people that could. I am speaking on language features. The thing is, I already spent 100's of hours developing FalconJX from the ground up and for me to put that much time into more compiler development, there would have to be money, more specifically, an ecosystem that is starting to create things in a new way. I can say this, I would not spend more time on this project just to make Flash developers more money before they left for HTML5/JS. So for me, I really am on Josh's wave where I like AS's language features. I would also love to add features to AS's compiler but for that to happen, things need to evolve and move forward, cause like I said, I am done making Flash developers money(components etc). I think what Josh meant by NextGen Actionscript hit the nail on the head with my sentiment. Mike > > - Josh > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 4:32 PM, jude <flexcapaci...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I saw this on Twitter, ""Introducing NextGen ActionScript" via @ > > *joshtynjala* <https://twitter.com/joshtynjala> => http:// > > joshblog.net/2015/introducing-nextgen-actionscript/ … > > <https://t.co/AnMp1Vw7p7>" > > > > Not to be nitpicky but I think it's misleading. I'm stoked about the new > > website and tutorials. In fact everything, but when I read, "NextGen > > ActionScript" I thought of the NextGen AS3 project that Adobe started and > > then abandoned. Knowing that it wasn't the Adobe project but knowing what > > you've been working on I immediately did believe AS3 was going to be > > getting new features. I didn't want to get my hopes up that it was an > AS3.5 > > or AS4 type of project but after reading the blog post I was still > > disappointed even with all of the good news in it. > > > > To me the title is misleading and other AS3 devs may respond the same way > > when they read it. While we are trying to announce the good news about > F-JS > > we might want to make clearer the distinction. BTW If these things are > > planned and or I've misunderstood let me know. > > > > > > On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Thanks for the reminder. I'll get the trademark attribution cleaned up > > this > > > week. > > > > > > Would it be acceptable to create a specific legal page, linked from the > > > footer, that displays the Apache Flex trademark attribution text? I > > should > > > probably acknowledge some Adobe trademarks too, just to be safe, so > > that's > > > going to be a lot to add to the footer. The page you linked seems to > > imply > > > that's allowed, as long as all trademark attribution is in the same > > place, > > > but I figured I'd check. > > > > > > - Josh > > > On Nov 29, 2015 2:10 AM, "Justin Mclean" <justinmcl...@me.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > We have to be a little careful here to not be seen to endorse 3rd > > > parties > > > > from our official site. > > > > > > > > Currently that code is "Copyright 2015 Bowler Hat LLC” and not under > > any > > > > obvious license, it would be nice if that was made clearer. > > > > > > > > Josh it would also be good if you attribute Apache trademarks > correctly > > > > [1] and if you could and link back to the Apache Flex web site. Just > > > adding > > > > a TM to the first mention and a line in the footer is all that is > > > needed. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Justin > > > > > > > > 1. http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/#guidelines > > > > > >
