Maybe in this sense we should gather a rough idea of what people have as their needs/targets. Should we start a [Discussion] thread separately to gather this information?
Looking for things like what you stated a below you... "I develop browser based database front-ends". Collecting the communities current uses could help drive/fuel the decisions for how we migrate vs. just guessing what the possible majority is. -----Original Message----- From: Hordur Thordarson [mailto:hor...@lausn.is] Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 9:08 To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [POLL] - Must Flex 5 be a complete rewrite or can flex code base be re-architectured? Good points made by Ben and I totally agree that the rewrite-or-not decision cannot be made without first knowing if this project is to be about maintaining and improving the current Flex framework, or about creating a new and then possibly very different framework with little or no legacy support. I develop browser based database front-ends and I have to say that there is nothing out there that comes anywhere close to rivaling the maturity, abilities, development speed and deployment conveniance of the current Flex/Flash player combo. So while I understand the problem of being tied to the AS3 VM and Flash player, unfortunately this same combo is a big part of what makes Flex attractive to enterprize developers. The runtime is free, easy to get and works the same in every browser almost since time began. Building database front-ends and data vizualisation tools in HTML/JS/CSS requires you to give up a large chunk of your sanity, because the technology is immature and non-standardized, the toolset is years behind what Flex has and at deployment time you have to deal with endless browser diffs and bugs. So I certainly had hoped that Apache Flex would be about improving the current framework rather than ditching it and writing yet another Gui framework on top of HTML/JS/CSS. My opinion is, having read what there is to be had, about Adobe's intentions with the Flash player and ActionScript, that Flash player isn't going anywhere. And while it is there, it will most likely include the AS3 VM just like it has had the AS2 VM for years. Which means that there is plenty of time to wait for other, better deployment possibilities to come along. On 16.11.2012, at 13:55, Joan Llenas Masó wrote: > Flex to me is: > 1. Cross browser/platform > 2. MXML. > 3. Modularity > 4. Spark architecture I would agree with this, BUT, and for many of us I think this is a big BUT, I would add #5 which is the extremely easy, well known deployment of client apps to any desktop where Flash player is available. Those are my two cents :) Hörður Þórðarson Lausn Iceland On 16.11.2012, at 13:28, Ben Dalton wrote: > It depends on the goals of the Flex project. If we are looking to create > something that is purpose built for the Flash runtime, then I don't believe > so. > > However, if we are looking at Flex as a toolkit to build rich interfaces > and are willing to break from the SWF compile target being our core focus, > then I believe yes. > > I think that question really needs to be answered first. > > While I love Flex as-is, we are seeing Adobe's priorities change for the > runtime and even some version fragmentation that we hadn't before (pepper > flash player in chrome and the MS flash player built into metro IE). It > pains me to say this but it looks like the standard HTML js CSS world is > receiving all of the developer efforts right now and I think that we should > make that a focus if we want this project to survive and thrive beyond the > next year or two. > > There is a conflict of interest here which I'm sure we are all aware of. > The goals of building the best toolkit for rich applications for mass > consumption and the goals of enhancing the current toolkit to continue > servicing our enterprise clients seem to be in conflict. > > This is my two cents of an opinion and I will be glad if I am mistaken. > > > > On Friday, November 16, 2012, sébastien Paturel wrote: > >> After several discussions about the difficulty to break UIComponent for >> example, and the whole re-architecturing of flex SDK issue. >> I'd like to launch this poll to see if there's a consensus about it. >> >> So in your opinion flex SDk: >> >> 1- Need a complete re write >> 2- Can be re architectured from the current code base >> >> Thanks >> >>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
