So far it looks like two items have emerged.
We should give FlexJS its own pages and fanfare. Maybe we should move the Tour de Flex to the Development tab. It does have a good amount of examples in it. However it seems to have each example compiled separately. Which makes everything take longer to load when you click between examples. Side question for the FlexJS. Would it be beneficial to have a new AS namespace / set of components that match the new style used in the FlexJS... this to allow ability to target both flash and flexjs without creating so many FlexJS only beads? -Mark -----Original Message----- From: carlos.rov...@gmail.com [mailto:carlos.rov...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Carlos Rovira Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2016 8:23 PM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: Starting fresh / new developers flexjs.apache.org would be great, but maybe even something like flexjs.com or apacheflexjs.com or something like that... would it be possible (although internaly it will be as well flex.apache.org/flexjs, but just a main domain pointing to a subdomain or page inside a subdomain that will give some relevance and entity...a huge point in marketing the technology) 2016-12-27 21:53 GMT+01:00 OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com>: > On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Christofer Dutz < > christofer.d...@c-ware.de > > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > First of all I would favor a FlexJS site written in FlexJS. I can > > definitely provide the parts we need to add in order to have this auto > > published, as I just recently fought this fight. Especially based on the > > MDL example (which looks amazing). > > > > I think in Apache all projects have their own sub-domain, but not more > > than one. So I think in our case we are stuck to “flex.apache.org” but > > could continue with an URL like http://flex.apache.org/flexjs > > Keeping things inside the “flex” domain sort of underlines that this is > > part of the flex project and not a separate flexjs project. > > > > > Good idea. I'm all for it. > > I think we can still ask for flexjs.apache.org even though FlexJS is part > of Apache Flex. Can someone with more knowledge please confirm? > > Thanks, > Om > > > > Chris > > > > > > Am 27.12.16, 11:28 schrieb "carlos.rov...@gmail.com im Auftrag von > Carlos > > Rovira" <carlos.rov...@gmail.com im Auftrag von > > carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com>: > > > > Hi, > > > > I think FlexJS web is a must, something that points directly to > FlexJS > > and > > market all the thing (no mentions to old Flex SDK). > > And I think this should have its own domain and a great modern look > and > > feel with accurate marketing reading and images. > > > > As well we could have a section with the easy start examples Josh did > > in > > the wiki (maybe this time with runtime companions), an many other > > stuff. > > > > I think the right tool for this is a Wordpress website so we could > make > > things fast, easy and good looking, I can help with that in that > > format, in > > other systems I'm not fluent. > > > > my 2ctns > > > > Carlos > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2016-12-26 21:55 GMT+01:00 Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@gmail.com>: > > > > > 1. I think FlexJS would benefit from its own dedicated page on the > > main > > > website that describes its benefits in a more polished, bite-sized > > form. > > > Basically, more of a marketing page that keeps the architecture > > discussion > > > limited to high-level bullet points. If someone really wants to > dive > > in to > > > the nitty gritty details, we have multiple pages in the wiki that > go > > more > > > in-depth on the architecture. > > > > > > 2. The Flex SDK Installer is still working well, in my opinion. > > We've been > > > able to successfully tweak the install scripts when we release new > > SDK > > > updates, as necessary, and there hasn't been a need to push updates > > to the > > > installer app. For instance, Adobe recently changed AIR SDK for Mac > > to be a > > > DMG file, and the upcoming Flex 4.16 will support this different > > format. > > > Older SDKs won't work with AIR 24 and newer, though, and if we > > wanted to > > > support that, we'd need to release small updates to each of them. > > > > > > The manual install instructions should still be accurate. Users > > simply need > > > to pass the installer.xml file to Ant (and, optionally, versions > for > > > Flash/AIR stuff) and the rest is automated. > > > > > > In both cases, the SDK will work in IDEs. Ultimately, the same > > install > > > script is run. A FlexJS project may require extra tweaks in certain > > IDEs > > > because they don't know about FlexJS and we're tricking them into > > thinking > > > this is the classic Flex SDK. > > > > > > 3. I think that Tour de Flex provides a ton of good examples for > > getting > > > started the Flex SDK. I see that it's under "About Flex" in the > main > > > website menus. It might be good if we could add it under > > "Documentation" > > > too. Tour de Flex is good as both an overview of everything that's > > > available, but also as a resource for experienced Flex developers > to > > review > > > during development. It might be smart to make the menu it say "Tour > > de Flex > > > Code Examples", "Tour de Flex Component Explorer", or something > > that's a > > > little more clear on what it actually is. It might even be smart to > > pull > > > out Tour de Flex into its own section on the main page as the user > > scrolls > > > down. > > > > > > On the wiki, I recently started creating some simple examples for > the > > > FlexJS Basic components: > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/ > > FlexJS+Basic+components > > > > > > This probably isn't super easy to find from the main website, > though. > > > > > > There has also been talk of a Tour de FlexJS on the mailing list. > > Something > > > like that would definitely be good! Maybe as a replacement for my > > simple > > > examples above, or a more in-depth kind of thing. > > > > > > - Josh > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Mark Kessler < > > > kesslerconsult...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I'd like to start a discussion aimed at prospective new > > > > developers. This is sort of an in-process review. The end state > > > > getting feedback on our current setup just to make sure we are > > making > > > > it easy for new folks. > > > > > > > > Let's setup the ground rules of working on constructive / > > > > positive. Giving feedback for issues found or ideas for growth > are > > > > great. Focus being on a new person blindly walking into Flex and > > > > attempting to get started from scratch. > > > > > > > > > > > > Here are some starting points to get things moving (can add > > more). > > > > I consider this to be sort of a 1/2/3 in terms of steps to get > > > > started. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Presentation to new users. IE the flex website. It looks > > good, > > > > but I've been looking at the same one over the years and I may be > > > > complacent with it's design. > > > > > > > > - Is it still easy enough for a new developer to walk into, see > our > > > > highlights and figure out how to get started? > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. The SDK installer or manual SDK download. > > > > > > > > - Is the SDK installer still easy to download and have an SDK be > > ready > > > > for whatever IDE you choose? > > > > > > > > - Does the manual SDK setup still work by our instructions? > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. Easy to find examples. Like off the main website. > > > > > > > > -Do we provide simple examples (hello world, basic forms, basic > > > > concepts, states) for different compiled targets (swf, air, > native, > > > > FlexJS)? > > > > > > > > -Do we have any more advanced examples (client server > > communication, > > > > advanced event handling, promises)? > > > > > > > > -Are the video's we have too old or are they still valid? > > > > > > > > -Do we need a new video's or a more detailed line of them? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the holiday time period and everyone is busy, so I image > this > > > > email chain to take a while. No rush and no worries. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Mark > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Carlos Rovira > > Director General > > M: +34 607 22 60 05 > > http://www.codeoscopic.com > > http://www.avant2.es > > > > Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede > > contener > > información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje > > por > > error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma > > vía y > > proceda a su destrucción. > > > > De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le > > comunicamos > > que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es > > CODEOSCOPIC > > S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del > > servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso, > > rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a > > nuestras > > oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la > documentación > > necesaria. > > > > > > > -- Carlos Rovira Director General M: +34 607 22 60 05 http://www.codeoscopic.com http://www.avant2.es Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le comunicamos que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso, rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a nuestras oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación necesaria.
