Hi Randy, > I think releasing an identical version with the same version number > will cause confusion. Especially since the signed RSL issue has yet to > be sorted out. Let version 4.6 belong to Adobe. I would go so far as > to say to consider resetting the version number because it currently > seems tied into Flash Builder version which will also cause confusion > moving forward.
Just to be clear on my opinion, I suggested the same codebase, but didn't actually say anything about version number. For me the clarification between Adobe Flex and Apache Flex would be enough, but I also understand how that can be confusing. In any case, what I won't agree with is releasing it as a "full" version of Flex. Potential users should be warned about the differences and less functionality on the Apache version. As I said in another post, it would be just a rough test case for both applications built with the released versions of Adobe Flex and potentially for tool vendors that want to get their tools tested early against the new framework and try to find existing problems from the onset. Rui
