Adding to Bertrand's comments, there are some of us on the committer's list
that aren't actively committing at the moment, but monitoring things
closely and still very committed. The project is in a pretty unique phase,
and there are certain people that are a good fit for the current set and
volume
1) +1
2) -1
(Binding)
SDK upgrades in Flex have always been difficult enough. Package renaming is
a pretty trivial benefit given the cost.
sD
On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Omar Gonzalez wrote:
> It's no biggie, just wanted to make sure we didn't miss a binding vote if
> you were on PPMC sinc
For anyone else picking up this thread, my earlier question is also
answered and documented here under "Enable SDK Testability"
http://www.spoon.as/core-values/
sD
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Michael A. Labriola <
labri...@digitalprimates.net> wrote:
> The other concern is that we are likely to make more modification to
> existing code than to write brand new code for a while, IMO... to that end
> we are then trying to write tests against something that
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 7:58 AM, Omar Gonzalez wrote:
> No. It does not. That is why one of the biggest outstanding tasks is to
> get unit tests written for the Flex SDK. And a big reason why that hasn't
> been tackled is the highly coupled nature of the framework which will take
> quite a bit of
Thanks Mike. I saw heaps of discussion around Mustella and regarding the
selection of a test framework, but nothing specifically about the
(non)existence of unit tests for the framework.
I'm more than a little frightened that we don't have test coverage. Without
seeing the tests, I'm guessing that
for Mustella tests by adobe. I will start working on
> FlexUnit tests next time I see fit.
>
> yours
> Martin.
>
>
> On 28/02/2012 23:43, Scott Delamater wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>>
>> Yes the Marshall Plan is not about
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
> Yes the Marshall Plan is not about units, but I assume there is some vision
> for how to do "integration testing" or "functional testing". I thought
> FlexUnit had the ability to do more than just "unit tests". Or do you think
> we can ship
>
> I challenge all readers here
>
> Tell me a single feature that Flex needs more than a good designing and
> prototyping tool.
>From an informal office poll of some of our engineers here at Shutterfly,
my thoughts included:
- A real collections API (@see
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/d
>
> I hear many people are happy using intellij, but when I tried, I found the
> project properties and configuration to be lacking compare to what I find
> in flash builder.
There's definitely a bit of a learning curve switching, and some digging
around you have to do, but there's a lot of power
#49 +1 (Binding)
Alex, can you speak to the level of resourcing that FlashPlayer is
receiving from Adobe? I feel like that could help alleviate some of this
fear of abandonment. (I feel like some, maybe not all, of that fear is just
blowback from communication blunders.)
sD
> Flex 5, "The JavaScript Version" :)
Sign me up. :)
sD
On Jan 23, 2012 9:36 AM, "David Arno" wrote:
> Well it looks like this is a no-go due to the number of people that would
> veto it. Saves me the effort, so it was worth asking.
>
> Looks like I should therefore focus on my ideas for Flex 5
> There were barely clear announcements for Player releases by Adobe in the
past and also no concrete commitments about the time schedule. Its done
when its done.
Hmm...sounds strangely familiar...
Just catching up on this thread, so I'm a little late to the party, but
wanted to chime in.
In general I hope that when our community is discussing additions to the
SDK, we're talking about solid, lightweight, core features--like what (I
think) Peter's suggesting. Signals performs quite well as a
[Binding]
ID 49: 3
ID 42: 2
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 12:59 AM, David Arno wrote:
> Should we just ignore Falcon and instead consider a major overhaul of
mxmlc,
> or even a completely new compiler?
It sounds like, at best, we might be able to follow Falcon development
updates (and thanks in advance to Alex for keeping us appr
I hope I don't come across as snippy, but is it normal to have a lot of
discussion within a VOTE thread? It seems to turn that VOTE callout into a
false alarm.
Just wondering about typical procedures.
sD
On Jan 15, 2012 2:39 AM, "Peter Elst" wrote:
> > Because I have created a Apache Flex Logo
gt;
>
>
>
>
> Espen Skogen | Vice President | IB Tech Market | Investment Bank | J.P.
> Morgan | 125 London Wall, EC2Y 5AJ, London, United Kingdom | T:
> +442077420836 | espen.sko...@jpmorgan.com | jpmorgan.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Scott Delamater [ma
extracurricular" activity for this group.)
sD
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Gautam Pandey wrote:
> +1 Yes we need better maven support for flex. Because of unavailability of
> maven support we r not migrating to newer version.
>
> Thanks
> Gautam
> On Jan 13, 2012 5:34 A
I agree, this would be a huge add for enterprise work.
Especially with the recent XSS patch fiasco, having artifacts for the "A"
variants of the SDKs available would've been a big help for our team at
Shutterfly. I assume other enterprise consumers have generated similar
artifacts, and assuming we
+1
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Omar Gonzalez
wrote:
> forgot to add...
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Omar Gonzalez >wrote:
>
> > +1
>
Yeah, I think this warrants a new post.
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Tink wrote:
> On 10 Jan 2012, at 18:28, Stephane Beladaci wrote:
>
> What about Spark skinning and performance? Does Spark skinning affects
>> or not the performance of an application? I personally really like
>> Spark and
Regarding media, it's important to note that most technology decisions are
driven (at least in part) by someone who's aware of what's going on in that
tech space--even in a small company. That's obvious, I know, but if Apache
Flex is a great product, the technology "deciders" will understand that.
24 matches
Mail list logo
