On 3/1/12 3:25 PM, "Om" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Right, but why are mx components shipping when equivalent spark versions
> are available? This to me is the biggest sticking point. Can we nix mx
> components from future releases if that is the 'old' way of doing things?
>
> Was the original plan (by Adobe's Flex team) to get to 100% mx <=> spark
> parity before nixing mx in a future release? If yes, can someone explain
> the motivations for such a decision?
Adobe would deprecate the mx components and think about removing them much
later. But I think that we've heard lots of folks who want Adobe to donate
3.x so MX is still very much needed. It isn't just about replacing mx: with
s:, there are lots of other differences that make the conversion risky.
>
> (Non-rhetorical question) Is everyone okay with different components with
> completely different architectures and supporting different sets of
> features with the same names shipping alongside in the same SDK? If yes,
> what are the benefits?
There are no benefits, but backwards compatibility is a reality.
>
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
