I vote for keeping the package names same, i.e. flash.*.* The proposed package name swapping seems to confusing. And could be error-prone.
We already have package names like jquery.*.* and createjs.*.* where we are using the same package names for consistency. Are we proposing to change all those package names as well, so that we dont set expectations of doing everything that jquery does? If it turns out that that lot of folks complain about the classes not meeting the expectations, we could probably add the features or worst case swap the package names to flex.* Thanks, Om On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:10 PM, lizhi <s...@qq.com> wrote: > no need some fork.no need extends,it just the final. > > now the code and get a.swf and a.js from one code. > > and can get starling.js. > > if chang the package name. > > we can not get a.swf,and starling.js > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/Discuss-Accept-donation-of-drawing-APIs-tp52429p52486.html > Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
