I'm not a fan of changing the package names. Already this week we heard folks
wanting AMF because they don't want to change their backend, and I've heard
several folks wanting a more Spark-like API surface for FlexJS. My new mantra
for 2016 is to try to not make more work for folks who are mi
If someone will help me with that I'll do it. What I'm thinking is when you
create a new Flex project you get all of the SWC's by default.
So in this case we have something like this:
[image: Inline image 1]
We need to add the new components set in there, the as3commons in there and
the other pa
flex-sdk_release-candidate - Build #120 - Successful
Changes since last build:
No changes
For more information, check the console output at
http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/flex-sdk_release-candidate/120/.
TLF is in a separate repo, but is shipped with the Flex SDK. We could
probably do it the same way.
Thanks,
Om
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 1:30 AM, Christofer Dutz
wrote:
> Hi ... adding my few cents to the discussion ;-)
>
> - I would vote for streamlining the packaging and give it some package /
Hi ... adding my few cents to the discussion ;-)
- I would vote for streamlining the packaging and give it some package /
artifact names down the path of "org.apache.flex.commons" ... no real need for
the "as3" as I think the apache-flex allready sets the path.
- I would make it a seperate sub-p
Hey, you committer ;-) You have all the power to drag those components and
put them in. I like your idea.
Thanks,
Om
On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 12:27 AM, jude wrote:
> Since Flex was open sourced it's felt like to me it's stagnated. We had all
> of these new components donated or proposed to be do
Since Flex was open sourced it's felt like to me it's stagnated. We had all
of these new components donated or proposed to be donated proposed to be
worked on and I haven't seen any of them. I think it's because it's in some
white board somewhere. I hate that. Put them in the main branch. Put it in
