Hi, BTW I don't think that in order to be submitted that code must address 100% of the list we not want the bar too high. People can apply patch after code is submitted to fill in gaps etc. but it still useful to document what work may still be required to have a first class component.
Perhaps we need to keep a list of donated components and colour code them to how "complete" they are and what coudl be done to improve them? Someting like http://caniuse.com/#feat=websockets but on the wiki? > Would this be tracked best using JIRA so the contributor can submit the > details about a donation? Great idea. I had not filled out a JIRA enhancement to add the PostCodeValidator to the SDK and probably should do so. > One question I do have, what is the criteria to answer your #1? For example > Michael pointed out he tried to talk Adobe out of HGroup. I have to say I (respectfully) disagree with Michael here. There's is a portion of Flex SDK users that were helped by HGroup and VGroup (as they were use to the old way of doing things). Not all users of the SDK are expert developers. Expert developers can choice to ignore features like that if they want to, and other than a small increase to SDK size there's no penalty for not using them. I actually find I still use VGroup and HGroup even though I know I can use Group, but then I wouldn't be too upset if they didn't exist. Thanks, Justin
