> From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] > Sent: 23 January 2012 05:29 > > > On 1/22/12 9:22 AM, "Tink" <f...@tink.ws> wrote: > > > > If automation is missing in our first release, wouldn't that break all > > automation testing that companies have invested in? > > Yes, and we would note that in the release notes. I think we'd have to lower > our goal of the first release to not be something that EVERY person using > Adobe Flex can replace. I certainly wouldn't want to hold up releases of everything > else while we work out the legal and business kinks on automation.
Sorry to be blunt Alex, but that is a truly idiotic suggestion. "Hey world, here's the first ever Apache release of Flex. Please note, before attempting to use it, you should read our release notes where we detail all of the bits of Adobe Flex that you likely use, but that Adobe chose not to denote to us after all. You'll likely stick with 4.6 as a result, but hey at least Flex is open source now, even if it's broken." Great PR that would be! This slow drip drip of news over which bits of the SDK won't after all be released to us due to legal reasons is getting ridiculous. Go away, sort it *all* out, then come back and tell us what's missing from what we can have. We can then work out how to write our own version of all the missing parts. Then, and only then, will it make sense to make a release. David.
