RE: Apache Flex 4.9 Release Candidate 3

I have to support the backwards-compatibility over new features argument. My main motivation for deploying the new version to existing applications would be for bug fixes. My feeling is that routine update activities should aim to be as low impact as possible, so they can be rolled out widely wi

[jira] [Commented] (FLEX-33295) Flash player will go into an infinite loop on certain cases of trying to wrap text.

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33295?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13530825#comment-13530825 ] Ian Appleby commented on FLEX-33295: Is this one of the related existing is

RE: Draft release notes for Apache Flex 4.9

Hi, Nothing major, but as a nicety: "For a full list see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX"; Could this be changed to a link with a filter on that picks out the relevant issues? I'd have a go, but it seems to be down right now. "- A SDK installer" should be "An", forgive my pedantry. -

RE: [POLL] - Must Flex 5 be a complete rewrite or can flex code base be re-architecture?

To be clear, would the intention here to be a limited subset for multi-platform, with everything maintained for swf legacy? Perhaps dumping mx and keeping spark, or some subtler equiv? Or to have mx as an additional module only available on swf? - Ian -Original Message- From: Kessler CTR