Well, then can we agree that your initial response to the poster that his comment did not belong on this list because we are not developing AIR was not a appropriate response?
I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. I'm making sure we don't send people packing because we don't understand their initial post, and don't turn away ideas that might be an important part of the still uncertain future of flex. On Apr 3, 2012, at 10:56 PM, Omar Gonzalez <omarg.develo...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tuesday, April 3, 2012, Martin Heidegger wrote: > >> On 04/04/2012 14:21, Omar Gonzalez wrote: >> >>> ... whether we should be developing ANEs for the Flex framework, etc. >>> >> >> I think that topic can be handled like any other topic: If someone is >> interested working on it: Let them. I do not see a reason to veto on it. >> There are already air specific classes in the sdk. >> >> yours >> Martin. >> > > I wasn't vetoing or suggesting that ANEs be vetoed. I was saying we haven't > reached a consensus about including ANEs in Apache Flex and nobody has > contributed one for us to vote on or veto. > > -omar
