played.
>
> -Message d'origine-
> From: Alex Harui
> Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 1:58 AM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
>
>
>
>
>> Until all the tests pass in the actual official version of the S
misconfigured ?
I can't figure out how... could you elaborate pls ?
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 1:58 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Until all the tests pass in the actual official version
> Until all the tests pass in the actual official version of the SDK,
> switching to another swf version shouldn't be a problem when re-generating
> the images.
> Do I miss something ?
Again, if you generate your own baselines, there is a chance you are
misconfigured and will miss something.
--
ovember 07, 2012 12:03 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 11/6/12 2:48 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
ok, I see :)
ps: Given it's slower, will it be mixed with the today pixel based
framework
in order to be used only when there is hassle d
On 11/6/12 2:48 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> ok, I see :)
>
> ps: Given it's slower, will it be mixed with the today pixel based framework
> in order to be used only when there is hassle dealing with differences in
> the rendering pipeline ?
>
I suppose we could do that. We'll see as I ge
: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 11/6/12 3:54 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
Ok, I'll do that tonight then, I'm at work now.
My early prototype of display list compares worked fine for AIR,
FlashPlayer 11.1 and FlashPlayer 10.3
You made
Done: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33242
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 8:24 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 11/5/12 10:44 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
1- Is it preferable
On 11/6/12 3:54 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> Ok, I'll do that tonight then, I'm at work now.
>
>> My early prototype of display list compares worked fine for AIR,
> FlashPlayer 11.1 and FlashPlayer 10.3
>
> You made me curious about what you did exactly :)
Instead of saving bitmaps, you s
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 8:25 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 11/5/12 10:44 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> 1- Is it preferable to wait for the relative tests pass before open a jira
?
Open it now and put in your patch before your hard disk
On 11/5/12 10:44 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> 1- Is it preferable to wait for the relative tests pass before open a jira ?
Open it now and put in your patch before your hard disk crashes. And leave
a note that you have more things to add later.
> 2- My plan was to create a sub task of this
x-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 11/5/12 5:50 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
Actually, I implemented the last one tonight, it took me a bit of time in
notepad ^^ but it does the job, I still have to modify the tests themself
and that, should take me until
On 11/5/12 5:50 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> Actually, I implemented the last one tonight, it took me a bit of time in
> notepad ^^ but it does the job, I still have to modify the tests themself
> and that, should take me until the end of the week end, I'll be busy this
> week.
>
> Now those
ine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2012 6:29 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 11/4/12 11:35 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
I'm for the last proposal and I was thinking about to create an other
assertion like AssertErrorCon
On 11/4/12 11:35 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> I'm for the last proposal and I was thinking about to create an other
> assertion like AssertErrorContains which would take an Array as parameter to
> check the error value against.
>
> Something like
>
I think I would just add a "contains" pr
ovember 05, 2012 6:12 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 11/4/12 6:51 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
3- I've still got 48 failures, that's because they expect english error
text
to be return and my debug flash player version output them in
On 11/4/12 6:51 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> 3- I've still got 48 failures, that's because they expect english error text
> to be return and my debug flash player version output them in french.
>
> [java] resources/Locale/Properties/Locale_Properties_variant
> Locale_variant_is_read_on
.resources.Locale.
How can I make that pass ? (I tried to change the os and keybord language to
US but it didn't change anything)
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 6:37 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 10/28/12 9:55 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> The SDK should not need to be built for particular player versions.
>
> Currently 4.8 requires 11.1 (specified as minimum player version in
> flex-config.xml) which means as far as I'm aware you can't compile an
> application using the c
Hi,
> The SDK should not need to be built for particular player versions.
Currently 4.8 requires 11.1 (specified as minimum player version in
flex-config.xml) which means as far as I'm aware you can't compile an
application using the current SDK and make it run in flash player 11.0 or
below. T
On 10/28/12 8:42 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> Just update from svn, rebuilt, ran mustella tests and got 104 fails, 55
> related to MarshallPlan (FP11.1)
You probably need to setup an http server. Tests expect to use localhost to
get at some sub-swfs for testing.
>
>> I still think that if
check out set playerglobal / swf-version
in the build.properties and build the framework, where is the risk ?
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 4:30 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 10/28/12 1:27 AM, &quo
On 10/28/12 1:27 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> Anyway, I don't want to change the actual things, my goal basicly was to be
> able to build and test the current framework against a particular
> playerglobal version and make sure the tests would pass if I modify the
> framework, I discovered 2
On 10/28/12 12:59 AM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just a suggestion why not add the flash player version to the image path if
> they differ by a signifiant amount? That way we have multiple baselines, and
> any new changes would show up if they break one or more versions of the flash
> p
On 10/28/12 12:37 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
>> Maybe I'm not understanding your strategy. If someone tries to use your
> proposed build.properties and changes player versions, they will get
> failures against your 10.3 baselines, won't they?
>
> If someone check out the sdk and in order t
lks easier because
they would be aware of its importance.
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 9:13 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
It could be done but it's not necessary IMO, each other can modify and
From: Justin Mclean
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 8:59 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Hi,
Just a suggestion why not add the flash player version to the image path if
they differ by a signifiant amount? That way we have multiple baselines, and
any n
8:37 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Maybe I'm not understanding your strategy. If someone tries to use your
proposed build.properties and changes player versions, they will get
failures against your 10.3 baselines, won't they?
If someone check out
Hi,
Just a suggestion why not add the flash player version to the image path if
they differ by a signifiant amount? That way we have multiple baselines, and
any new changes would show up if they break one or more versions of the flash
player.
Justin
check
in 10.3 baselines?
The baseline images generated should not be check in to the svn server by
contributors, the base still has to be the existing 11.1/14.
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 8:13 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re
On 10/28/12 12:07 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
>> So changing swf.version and running with -createImages doesn't really tell
> you anything
>
Maybe I'm not understanding your strategy. If someone tries to use your
proposed build.properties and changes player versions, they will get
failures
eline image for this particular swf version, once done,
I can change the code, take another snapshot and compare them.
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Sunday, October 28, 2012 5:19 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
I think there is
of the sdk with a particular playerglobal and swf-version, generates
> the images before he modifies the framework and then run the normal Mustella
> tests without regenerate the images.
>
> Please tell me if I missed something ?
>
> -Message d'origine-----
> From: Frédéri
efore he modifies the framework and then run the normal Mustella
tests without regenerate the images.
Please tell me if I missed something ?
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 8:32 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Fl
27;m wrong ?
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 7:34 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Ok, I've got it.
I thought building the framework with the good swf-version was enough :$
So, I'm gonna wai
org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
I don't understand how your change to build.properties helps.
Running -createImages creates new baselines, so you would expect all tests
to pass. But if you check those in, then it will fail for other
swf-versions. I think the swf-version needs to be set
how flash player draws fonts,
> the correction is done.
>
> Do you want me to attach a patch to the issue ?
>
> -Message d'origine-
> From: Frédéric THOMAS
> Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 6:13 PM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: About Fle
On 10/27/12 8:09 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
>> We could try changing the swf version on every test that doesn't require
>> it
> to a lower number and re-create all the baseline images.
>
> is the createImages option enough to build the baseline images?
Yes.
>
>> Explictly setting swf versio
: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 5:09 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
We could try changing the swf version on every test that doesn't require
it
to a lower number and re-create all the baseline images.
is the createImages option enou
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 5:09 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
We could try changing the swf version on every test that doesn't require
it
to a lower number and re-create all the baseline images.
is the createImages option enough to build th
ubject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 10/27/12 5:02 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
Back on 10.3, I did some adjustments: setting
DEFAULT_NUM_COLOR_VARIANCES:int = 255 and the default value of
ignoreMaxColorVariance to true in the CompareBitmap class, I've been able
to
reduce the nu
On 10/27/12 7:55 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> I didn't changed the swf version at all, only the playerglobal.version =
> 10.3 in the build properties and the corresponding FP in env.properties :
>
>
> env.FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER=T:\\opt\\flashplayer-10.3.183.29\\flashplayer_debug.e
> xe
> #en
4:10 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 10/27/12 5:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
Looks like 10.3 chooses antialiasing differently than 11.1
I can be wrong but it doesn't seem relative to the version of the Flash
Player because whatever the Flash Player v
On 10/27/12 5:02 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> Back on 10.3, I did some adjustments: setting
> DEFAULT_NUM_COLOR_VARIANCES:int = 255 and the default value of
> ignoreMaxColorVariance to true in the CompareBitmap class, I've been able to
> reduce the number of failed tests to 1 (only
> text_lo
On 10/27/12 5:32 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
>> Looks like 10.3 chooses antialiasing differently than 11.1
>
> I can be wrong but it doesn't seem relative to the version of the Flash
> Player because whatever the Flash Player version I was using during the
> tests while compiling with player
an it be related to the way the compiler treats the resources ? is it
based on a given playerglobal version ?
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 2:15 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Looks like 10.3 chooses an
say we're in a lower version of the player and the tests
should be more tolerants.
What do you think ?
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 11:04 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Forget my last post p
[java] Wrote failures to failures.txt
call_runners:
run:
BUILD SUCCESSFUL
Total time: 1 minute 31 seconds
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 10:52 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Just did the tests on Lab
Just did the tests on Label against the 11.4 and had the same failures than
the 10.3
-Message d'origine-
From: Justin Mclean
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 2:19 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Hi,
Looks like 10.3 chooses antiali
This one https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33233
-Message d'origine-
From: Om
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 9:18 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
On 10/26/12 10:08 PM, "
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 10/26/12 10:08 PM, "Om" wrote:
>
> > Alex,
> >
> > Is there a JIRA ticket for this?
> A JIRA ticket for what?
For this:
Alex:
> Haven't tried any other players. It would be great to see other community
> members try it out.
>
On 10/26/12 10:08 PM, "Om" wrote:
> Alex,
>
> Is there a JIRA ticket for this?
A JIRA ticket for what? There is a ticket for the 10.3 failures.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Hi,
> Justin, what would be best way to enable testing on different player
> versions on Jenkins?
Currently the Jenkin's setup can't handle running Mustella. I tried a while
back but got nowhere (the job just hangs when it run the flash player).
Even if we did manage to get it to work there's on
Alex,
Is there a JIRA ticket for this? Can you please create one with the
requirements for testing? I can create sub-tasks for each flash player
version we want to test. That would make it easier for the community to
take them up one by one.
Justin, what would be best way to enable testing on d
On 10/26/12 5:19 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Looks like 10.3 chooses antialiasing differently than 11.1.
>
> Any idea about more recent versions greater than 11.1? I guess that's probably
> more important than getting all test to pass in 10.3.
Haven't tried any other players. It w
Did you notice as well that between the trunk and the develop branch, on
label at least, 2 tests were missing ?
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 1:15 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Well, I am able to repr
Both the extremes are important IMO and for sure I'll test with the 11.4 as
well and even air 3.4
-Message d'origine-
From: Justin Mclean
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 2:19 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Hi,
Looks like 10
Hi,
> Looks like 10.3 chooses antialiasing differently than 11.1.
Any idea about more recent versions greater than 11.1? I guess that's probably
more important than getting all test to pass in 10.3.
Thanks,
Justin
Looks like 10.3 chooses antialiasing differently than 11.1. We will have to
find a way to compensate in Mustella if we're going to officialy allow
different versions.
On 10/26/12 4:15 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
> Well, I am able to reproduce the issue when I run 10.3. I will have to
> verify tha
Well, I am able to reproduce the issue when I run 10.3. I will have to
verify that these tests are set up properly.
On 10/26/12 11:29 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/26/12 10:45 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
>
>> Apache Flex is suppose to support Flash Player from 10.3 to 11.1,
> Wel
On 10/26/12 10:45 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> Apache Flex is suppose to support Flash Player from 10.3 to 11.1,
Well, actually, we don't know. The official release is only known to work
with 11.1. Since then, Justin found that Flex compiles with Player 10.3 and
seemed to work, but now tha
it's the
reason ?), that's may be acceptable, just has to be known and mentioned, but
still, to know it, it has to be tested.
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 7:45 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex run
apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Hi,
When you say, "a version of the sdk in 10.3 and one in 11.1", I'm not
exactly sure what you mean. As far as I can tell from README in the Apache
Flex download, we are only targeting Flash Player 11.1, although 11.3 will
probably work as
M
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
I just open an issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33233#
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 6:07 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
P
>From: Peter Ent
>Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 5:11 PM
>To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
>
>That looks like it was related to a change I made to get spaces-in-paths
>to work for Mustella. I modified CompileMxmUtils to take ArrayList as an
>argument,
t
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 5:11 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
That looks like it was related to a change I made to get spaces-in-paths
to work for Mustella. I modified CompileMxmUtils to take ArrayList as an
argument, but none of the builds I did ran
I just open an issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33233#
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 6:07 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Please send them directly to me at aha...@adobe.com. I
hed are 2 examples.
>
>
> -Message d'origine-
> From: Alex Harui
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 6:00 PM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
>
>
> On 10/26/12 8:43 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
>
>> Already did bu
Here attached are 2 examples.
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 6:00 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 10/26/12 8:43 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
Already did but I don't know how to interp
On 10/26/12 8:43 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> Already did but I don't know how to interpret the informations, it looks
> like the 2 images haven't got the same size
That is possible, but then the console output for that test should have said
something like:
compare returned -3
or
comp
: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Already did but I don't know how to interpret the informations, it looks
like the 2 images haven't got the same size
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 5:33 PM
To: flex-dev@incubat
Already did but I don't know how to interpret the informations, it looks
like the 2 images haven't got the same size
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 5:33 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Image
d
> {
>
> init();
> ...
> }
>
> The init() function doesn't exist but there is a initLC() function
>
> -Message d'origine-
> From: Frédéric THOMAS
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 5:13 PM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sub
PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
I tried to install the air app and had in french a message saying the file
was damage.
For ImageDiff, i'm still trying to get why I've got this error
-Message d'origine-
From: Alex Harui
Sent: Friday, October
27;origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 1:55 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
In SwfLoaderTestAdapter, it should be "compm.compile(loader_mxml_file, new
ArrayList(Arrays.asList(args)));" instead of
"compm.compile(loader_mxm
>>defined
>> as an ArrayList whereas args is defined as String []
>>
>> -Message d'origine-
>> From: Frédéric THOMAS
>> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 1:08 PM
>> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
>&g
lowing error
> occurred while executing this line:
> U:\asf\flex\sdk\develop\mustella\build.xml:1625: Java returned: 1
>
> Total time: 1 minute 27 seconds
>
> -Message d'origine-
> From: Frédéric THOMAS
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 1:55 PM
> To: flex-dev@in
>
> -Message d'origine-
> From: Frédéric THOMAS
> Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 1:08 PM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
>
> I tried twice from yesterday to checkout de develop branch, once on my
> computer at work, on at
rédéric THOMAS
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 1:55 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
In SwfLoaderTestAdapter, it should be "compm.compile(loader_mxml_file, new
ArrayList(Arrays.asList(args)));" instead of
"compm.compile(loader_mxml_file, ar
List optionalArgs) throws Exception", the optionalArgs is defined
as an ArrayList whereas args is defined as String []
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 1:08 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
I tried
e compiler error output for details.
Total time: 3 seconds
What's wrong ?
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 2:57 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
unfortunatly, the only things I had time to do to
to be
simple, everythings worked in the wrong way.
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 7:09 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: About Flex runtime
Ok, I'll do that tomorrow now cuz' it's later here now, need to go back
Ok, I'll do that tomorrow now cuz' it's later here now, need to go back
home, I'll keep in touch.
Fred
-Original Message-
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 6:59 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex r
Oct 24 18:24:22
> GMT+0200 2012
>
>
>
> Doesn't it mean the playerglobal and the flashplayer debug version is the
> clue ?
>
> Fred
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Frédéric THOMAS [mailto:webdoubl...@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, Octob
0 2012
Doesn't it mean the playerglobal and the flashplayer debug version is the
clue ?
Fred
-Original Message-
From: Frédéric THOMAS [mailto:webdoubl...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 6:14 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: About Flex runtime
I
" bubbles=false cancelable=false eventPhase=2]
testComplete
That's it and that's the same kind for the others.
For the embedded font, I'm not sure about what you are talking, if it is the
flex-fontkit.jar, I've got it.
Fred
-Original Message-
From: Alex Harui [mailt
On 10/24/12 8:20 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" wrote:
> I tried to run "mini_run.sh -all" on Apache "Flex 4.8.0 FP10.3 en_US" but
> had some troubles then I tried with "mini_run.sh tests/components/Label"
> only :
>
> [java]
> [java]
> [java] =
> [j
Message-
From: Frédéric THOMAS [mailto:webdoubl...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 11:51 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
Sorry for my bad English, to be a bit more understandable, I should have
said, "even if the Apache Flex SDK has been tested
y thoughts
and it's more understandable but difficult to do in a once :$ ).
-Message d'origine-
From: Frédéric THOMAS
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 11:17 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
+1 for running Mustella for different supported v
.4 and AIR 3.4 but it never been
officially tested yet, even if from my tests, that works, so, it should be a
good thing do test it against Mustella IMO.
-Message d'origine-
From: Justin Mclean
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:47 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject:
Hi,
The SDK got modified a while back so that the Flex SDK can be compiled against
any version of the flash player 10.3-11.4. As a first step we should run the
Mustella tests against the Flex SDK compiled for different version of the flash
player and see if there is any issues.
Justin
: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
>
>On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Gordon Smith wrote:
>
>> Why are we stuck back on 11.1? 11.4 is current.
We were stuck on 11.1 because Apache Flex 4.8 was a parity release with
Adobe Flex 4.6. I think that is what this thread is about. Is now the
time to move forward?
Carol
layer (although Adobe tries
to ensure compatibility).
- Gordon
-Original Message-
From: omup...@gmail.com [mailto:omup...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Om
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:23 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:17 PM, G
need to we very careful when we bump up the flash player
version requirement.
Thanks,
Om
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:15 PM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
&g
Why are we stuck back on 11.1? 11.4 is current.
- Gordon
-Original Message-
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:15 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: About Flex runtime
On 10/23/12 12:04 PM, "Om" wrote:
> O
On 10/23/12 12:04 PM, "Om" wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/22/12 10:37 PM, "Ram Lee" wrote:
>>
>>> Which version of runtime(Flash Player and AIR runtime) is the Next Flex
>>> Release going to build on or compatible with?
>>>
>> What answ
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:02 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 10/22/12 10:37 PM, "Ram Lee" wrote:
>
> > Which version of runtime(Flash Player and AIR runtime) is the Next Flex
> > Release going to build on or compatible with?
> >
> What answer would you like to hear?
>
>
Great question! As an
On 10/22/12 10:37 PM, "Ram Lee" wrote:
> Which version of runtime(Flash Player and AIR runtime) is the Next Flex
> Release going to build on or compatible with?
>
What answer would you like to hear?
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
97 matches
Mail list logo
