We surely don't need a new namespace for new components that are spark based. That would mean that each time we release with some additional components we would end up adding a new namespace (i.e we'd have got a new namespace for a spark DataGrid) Namespaces are not them go show the date a component was introduced, but to group a codebase by the strategy it was developed under.
I would vote for keeping packages and name spaces the same unless a new underlying framework was introduced for new ui components to be built upon. That said I think it was insane that Adobe threw all ui components into a single "component" package with the introduction of spark instead of keeping the "container", "control" packing used in mx, with the extremely lame excuse that it was difficult to distinguish the difference between containers and controls in spark. All lumping them together did was make it more difficult for devs new to spark to find the correct component. Containers you can add elements to, controls you can't, doh Adobe! Too late to change this now though :( Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: >Hi, > >> Is this stating we migrate from mx/s to a new namespace, or simply start a >> new namespace for apache flex specific components? >No I think existing namespace should stay the same. Too much code and >documentation would have to change, I'm only talking about new >classes/components. > >Thanks, >Justin
