Well, if no one has objections, we can officially agree on it now… ;-) On Sep 8, 2016, at 11:15 AM, Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote:
> Hi Harbs, > > > well that's what I'm using when talking about FlexJS, but I couldn't remember > us actually agreeing on that ;-) > > > Chris > > ________________________________ > Von: Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 8. September 2016 09:33:44 > An: dev@flex.apache.org > Betreff: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Official naming for the "standard" Flex SDK > > I think falcon and falconjx can be blurred. > > I thought we agreed on "FlexJS Compiler" (falcon/falconjx), "FlexJS Typedefs” > (typedefs) and "FlexJS Framework" (asjs) > > On Sep 8, 2016, at 1:45 AM, Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: > >> I see it the same way ... Flex and FlexJS is good for me. The only thing I >> was having problems with, was the naming of the inside parts of FlexJS: >> falcon, falconjx, asjs, typedefs ... here I would like some sort of >> consolidation, but not really for Flex/FlexJS. >> >> >> Chris >> >> ________________________________ >> Von: OK <p...@olafkrueger.net> >> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 7. September 2016 23:58:19 >> An: dev@flex.apache.org >> Betreff: Re: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Official naming for the "standard" Flex SDK >> >> Thanks for your thoughts Marc and Alex. >> >>> I am hopeful that the "JS" in FlexJS will be enough of a differentiator. >> FlexJS is definately clear and unambiguously. >> >> Maybe I was on the wrong track and Apache Flex/Apache FlexJS is sufficient. >> >> Thanks, >> Olaf >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/Official-naming-for-the-standard-Flex-SDK-tp54897p54938.html >> Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
