I think I understand. IMO, it still feels worth it to me to maintain the
old behavior, even if it had issues, and find a way to switch to new
behavior and make the new behavior the default.
-Alex
On 6/6/14 4:55 PM, "Michael A. Labriola"
wrote:
>>I haven't looked at the failing tests, but could
>I haven't looked at the failing tests, but could it be true that those tests
>are not using XMLListCollection directly? They may wrap the XML in an
>XMLListCollection or just pass XML directly into the control where it gets
>wrapped, and then they manipulate the XML? I think there are lots of
I haven't looked at the failing tests, but could it be true that those
tests are not using XMLListCollection directly? They may wrap the XML in
an XMLListCollection or just pass XML directly into the control where it
gets wrapped, and then they manipulate the XML? I think there are lots of
people
>Are you saying that using XMLListCollection APIs to modify the source data has
>always been broken, or that you didn't like the behavior in how it >set up the
>parent? If there is some debate on what the behavior should be then there
>probably needs to be a flag to control that behavior. If i
I think I have the installer working the way I want it to on Mac. Will
try it on Windows this weekend, then start voting.
I think I have FlexJS working the wait I want it to on Mac. Will try it
on Windows this weekend and start voting on it too.
Once we get the main SDK back to working order, I
On 6/6/14 1:36 PM, "Nicholas Kwiatkowski" wrote:
>Well, the tests that are failing are because those items are directly
>manipulating the data underneath the the collection (this would be akin to
>manipulating the source array in an array collection, by putting watches
>on
>them, and changing t
Well, the tests that are failing are because those items are directly
manipulating the data underneath the the collection (this would be akin to
manipulating the source array in an array collection, by putting watches on
them, and changing the order without using the overlying collection. While
th
I still think you should add a flag that preserves old behavior. Mustella
is telling you that there is a potential that folks are relying on old
behavior. It is fine to default to new behavior and have the mustella
tests set the flag for old behavior (and make copies of those tests with
results e
I've reverted this back to the original version. I'll continue work in a
separate branch, but I need some help in testing that branch before I merge
again. This fixes a pretty nasty bug that we should really take care of.
-Nick
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Erik de Bruin wrote:
> -1 (bindi
Java Spring is a very good example for framework evolving, for Flex, I
think it is the similar situation:
The key function is
1) Mxml
2)Binding
3)Data structure such as IList implementations
on top of Mxml/Binding/Data is 1) UIComponent 2) Skinning 3)network
components
and then osmf, reporting,
> You can join your names together on the site.
I didn't find the way, can you tell me ?
Frédéric THOMAS
> Subject: Re: [DRAFT] Apache Flex June 2014 Report
> From: jus...@classsoftware.com
> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2014 23:54:55 +0100
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
>
> Hi,
>
> > -Frédéric Thomas
> > -Fré
Just to be sure (and get the legal stuff completely out of the way):
http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
Thanks for your contributions up till now and in the future!
EdB
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 10:33 AM, jude wrote:
> Harbs owns the code I commit on this project but if it will speed thi
Hi
> IMO, there is no real need to do this in the open.
+1 to doing it in the open - extra eyes on the checkins can't hurt.
Justin
Harbs owns the code I commit on this project but if it will speed things
along then by all means send me the ICLA.
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> IMO, there is no real need to do this in the open. It was just a hope of
> mine that it would be done in the open...
>
The way
14 matches
Mail list logo
