On 8/18/12 2:22 AM, "Cyrill Zadra" wrote:
> What has to be done, that the github repository get synced with the new
> flex structure? Or is this task already in progress?
Hopefully the folks setting up Git for Apache Flex will also deal with this.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems,
What has to be done, that the github repository get synced with the new
flex structure? Or is this task already in progress?
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski wrote:
> I'll update the site. I'll change the "view the source" page to outline
> the different projects we are host
I'll update the site. I'll change the "view the source" page to outline
the different projects we are hosting too. I'm just finishing up a
conference call at the moment, but will take care of it shortly.
-Nick
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Carol Frampton wrote:
> Nick,
>
> As a result of th
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Carol Frampton wrote:
> Nick,
>
> As a result of the svn reorg, the svn URL on this page needs to be updated
> [1]. There may be other places as well. Any links to the README out
> there also have to be updated.
>
> If I edit the page under site what else do I
Nick,
As a result of the svn reorg, the svn URL on this page needs to be updated
[1]. There may be other places as well. Any links to the README out
there also have to be updated.
If I edit the page under site what else do I have to do to make it live.
Unfortunately I've only half paid attentio
I've started this rearrangement. You should now be doing development work
out of
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/flex/sdk/branches/develop which
is a copy of trunk at rev 1373837.
Depending on how you are managing your code you may want to do a "svn
switch" or just re-checkout your co
Thanks, that helps! I believe you when you say that the overhead is going
to be low. That is what I care about.
Regards,
Om
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
> > I am sorry if I sound like I dont support modularity. But that is not
> > what I am saying here. By Gordon'
> I am sorry if I sound like I dont support modularity. But that is not
> what I am saying here. By Gordon's (who is probably the only person on
> this list who knows the Falcon codebase) own admission, Falcon is tied
> closely to the Flex framework because of the semantics of MXML.
Falcon is o
7;t think
we're clear on how that might work. But I'm sure we can figure something out.
- Gordon
-Original Message-
From: omup...@gmail.com [mailto:omup...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Om
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 12:19 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Falco
> This ^^^.
???
- Gordon
-Original Message-
From: Omar Gonzalez [mailto:omarg.develo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 11:45 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Falcon location
>
> IMO, you are arguing against the principle of modularity and/or
>
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Omar Gonzalez
wrote:
> >
> > IMO, you are arguing against the principle of modularity and/or
> separation
> > of concerns. Yes, there is a bit more overhead, but is should be worth
> it.
> > You voted for a much more complex branching strategy supposedly in favor
While I have no problem naming the directory flex/falcon I do understand
Om's concern that it is a code name that people may not know.
flex/newcompiler isn't very pretty.
Carol
On 8/15/12 2 :18PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>
>On 8/15/12 10:43 AM, "Om" wrote:
>
>> On Aug 15, 2012 9:07 AM, "Alex H
>
> IMO, you are arguing against the principle of modularity and/or separation
> of concerns. Yes, there is a bit more overhead, but is should be worth it.
> You voted for a much more complex branching strategy supposedly in favor of
> modularity. I'm surprised you are pushing back on it here.
>
On 8/15/12 10:43 AM, "Om" wrote:
> On Aug 15, 2012 9:07 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>>
>>
>>
> I agree that it is the way to go in the long run. But, from Gordon's
> description, it does not sound like Falcon its anywhere close to achieving
> this. In the short term, making it a top level p
On Aug 15, 2012 9:07 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 8/15/12 12:51 AM, "Om" wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 8/14/12 10:51 PM, "Om" wrote:
> >>
> >>> I dint see a strong reason for Falcon to be a top level project
anywhere
> >> in
On 8/15/12 12:51 AM, "Om" wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 8/14/12 10:51 PM, "Om" wrote:
>>
>>> I dint see a strong reason for Falcon to be a top level project anywhere
>> in
>>> this thread.
>>>
>> I think we eventually want to break the co
Carol,
We are still discussing the Falcon location in the other thread. Can you
please hold off on making this change until we finish?
Thanks,
Om
On Aug 15, 2012 8:14 AM, "Carol Frampton" wrote:
> I'm planning to reorganize svn on Thursday AM (EDT) as follows:
>
>
I'm planning to reorganize svn on Thursday AM (EDT) as follows:
Updated to move remove whiteboard from each sub-project
site
external
falcon
branches
tags
trunk
blazeds
branches
tags
trunk
sdk
branches
tags
trunk
tlf
branches
tags
trunk
utilities
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:35 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>...you may want to still have a top level whiteboard directory with sub
> directories (falcon, blazeds, sdk etc) rather than one under each project ...
I agree, no need for any rigid structure in whiteboard IMO - it's just
a playground.
-Be
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:11 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/14/12 10:51 PM, "Om" wrote:
>
> > I dint see a strong reason for Falcon to be a top level project anywhere
> in
> > this thread.
> >
> I think we eventually want to break the compiler's ties to a specific
> version of the SDK. Tha
On 8/14/12 10:51 PM, "Om" wrote:
> I dint see a strong reason for Falcon to be a top level project anywhere in
> this thread.
>
I think we eventually want to break the compiler's ties to a specific
version of the SDK. That gives it a better chance to be incorporated into
IDEs and used for ot
On Tuesday, August 14, 2012, Gordon Smith wrote:
> Even without FC (which I would forget about), don't you find it easier to
> skin in MXML because of its support for states? I am not concerned about
> making Falcon able to compile MXML skins. They are less complicated than
> MXML apps.
>
> - Gord
The thread was continued as "Rearrangement of ... Flex". Did you read that one
too? In any case, I think the discussion can continue and perhaps you will
persuade people. But my initial post explained why I don't think it belongs in
'modules', and no one else has wanted it there.
- Gordon
Se
On Tuesday, August 14, 2012, Om wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Gordon Smith
> >
> wrote:
>
> > A large majority of people replying to this thread favor SDK, Falcon,
> TLF,
> > BlazeDS, etc. being quasi-independent sub projects within the overall
> Flex
> > project, so that's what Caro
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:44 PM, Gordon Smith wrote:
> A large majority of people replying to this thread favor SDK, Falcon, TLF,
> BlazeDS, etc. being quasi-independent sub projects within the overall Flex
> project, so that's what Carol is planning for.
>
>
I think we should discuss this furth
Even without FC (which I would forget about), don't you find it easier to skin
in MXML because of its support for states? I am not concerned about making
Falcon able to compile MXML skins. They are less complicated than MXML apps.
- Gordon
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 14, 2012, at 10:40 PM, "Omar
On 8/14/12 10:39 PM, "Omar Gonzalez" wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 14, 2012, Alex Harui wrote:
> Being one of the strongest proponents of FC (I am in the promo video on the
> product page :P ) Should we even consider that tool for anything? It's EOL,
> why would we not do something like make AS
A large majority of people replying to this thread favor SDK, Falcon, TLF,
BlazeDS, etc. being quasi-independent sub projects within the overall Flex
project, so that's what Carol is planning for.
Sent from my iPad
On Aug 14, 2012, at 10:23 PM, "Om" wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:58 PM, G
On Tuesday, August 14, 2012, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/14/12 9:51 PM, "Justin Mclean" >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> >> I think Justin's looking for a stop gap solution for compiling MXML with
> >> Falcon.
> > 100% correct.
> >
> Interesting idea. However, I think AS compilation from scratch (as
As I've explained a few times, Falcon already has substantial support for MXML.
For example, it can compile Checkinapp, one of the SDK's test apps, except for
the Repeater tag in it. I encourage people to help me finish Falcon so that it
can replace the legacy compiler ASAP. The first thing you
On 8/14/12 9:51 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> I think Justin's looking for a stop gap solution for compiling MXML with
>> Falcon.
> 100% correct.
>
Interesting idea. However, I think AS compilation from scratch (as opposed
to incremental compilation used in the IDE) is only 2 or 3
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Gordon Smith wrote:
> > Falcon is a new version of the Actionscript compiler.
>
> Falcon is a reimplementation of mxmlc and compc. The AS support is very
> good. (It will ship as FB 4.7.) The MXML support is incomplete but Falcon
> can compile the framework test f
Hi,
> I think Justin's looking for a stop gap solution for compiling MXML with
> Falcon.
100% correct.
Thanks,
Justin
Hi,
> To me that sounds like a kludge with little benefit and presumably worse
> performance than either compiler by itself.
Fair enough.
> I take it that you are unhappy with the decision to compile MXML directly to
> ABC
No as such but I don't understand the reasoning behind it.
> What is th
On Tuesday, August 14, 2012, Gordon Smith wrote:
> Hi, Justin.
>
> To me that sounds like a kludge with little benefit and presumably worse
> performance than either compiler by itself. I take it that you are unhappy
> with the decision to compile MXML directly to ABC, for maximum performance,
> i
Hi, Justin.
To me that sounds like a kludge with little benefit and presumably worse
performance than either compiler by itself. I take it that you are unhappy with
the decision to compile MXML directly to ABC, for maximum performance, if it
means losing -keep? If so, you could work on a altern
Hi,
> I'm planning to reorganize svn on Thursday AM (EDT) as follows:
Structure looks good me. Although you may want to still have a top level
whiteboard directory with sub directories (falcon, blazeds, sdk etc) rather
than one under each project so you one need to look in one spot for
whiteb
Hi,
> Falcon right now is an ActionScript compiler with limited MXML support, so
> right now you can't simply change the old compiler by the new one.
Probably some reason to why we cant do this but couldn't we use the current
compiler to turn MXML into AS (-keep of top of head) and then use Falc
On Tuesday, August 14, 2012, Gordon Smith wrote:
>
>
> I like your lowercase names better. (sdk rather than SDK, etc.)
>
> - Gordon
>
>
>
+1 to lowercase names. :)
-omar
bject: rearrangement of https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/flex (was
Re: Falcon location)
I'm planning to reorganize svn on Thursday AM (EDT) as follows:
site
external
falcon
branches
tags
trunk
whiteboard
blazeds
branches
tags
trunk
whiteboard
sdk
branche
gmail.com [mailto:omup...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Om
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 12:59 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Falcon location
Gordon,
Sorry for jumping late into this thread, but I am not sure what exactly Falcon
is at this point. I was hoping that you would post some
Om,
Falcon right now is an ActionScript compiler with limited MXML support, so
right now you can't simply change the old compiler by the new one.
João Fernandes
Awesome!
When this happens, can it be set up so there are multiple read-only git
mirrors / repositories at that point? i.e. flex-sdk, flex-blazeds,
flex-falcon, flex-tlf, flex-utilities, etc.?
Jeff
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Greg Reddin wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Carol Fr
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:00 PM, Carol Frampton wrote:
> I'm planning to reorganize svn on Thursday AM (EDT) as follows:
Looks good.
Greg
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Carol Frampton wrote:
> I'm planning to reorganize svn on Thursday AM (EDT) as follows:
>
> site
> external
> falcon
> branches
> tags
> trunk
> whiteboard
> blazeds
> branches
> tags
> trunk
> whiteboard
> sdk
> branches
>
I'm planning to reorganize svn on Thursday AM (EDT) as follows:
site
external
falcon
branches
tags
trunk
whiteboard
blazeds
branches
tags
trunk
whiteboard
sdk
branches
tags
trunk
whiteboard
tlf
branches
tags
trunk
whiteboard
utilities
;
> -Original Message-
> From: Jonathan Campos [mailto:jonbcam...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:43 AM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Falcon location
>
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Carol Frampton
> wrote:
>
> > +1
On 8/14/12 3 :43PM, "Gordon Smith" wrote:
>It seems like the momentum is for
>
>incubator/flex
>incubator/flex/SDK
>incubator/flex/SDK/trunk
>incubator/flex/SDK/branches
>incubator/flex/SDK/tags
>incubator/flex/SDK/whiteboard
>incubator/flex/Falcon
>incubator/flex/Falcon/trunk
>incubator/flex/F
subprojects.
- Gordon
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Campos [mailto:jonbcam...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:43 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Falcon location
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Carol Frampton wrote:
> +1 except remove projects directory
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Carol Frampton wrote:
> +1 except remove projects directory and put each project at top-level and
> add tags subdirectory under each project
>
Agreed with Carol.
--
Jonathan Campos
On 8/14/2012 2:35 PM, Omar Gonzalez wrote:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Carol Frampton wrote:
+1 except remove projects directory and put each project at top-level and
add tags subdirectory under each project
+1, I like Carol's suggestion with João's structure.
I could get behind
Jeff, that's why I think we should have for each distinct project a trunk /
branches /tags folder (thanks Carol for pointing out). So If we get Falcon
donated, it doesn't have to fit within the SDK and we don't need to worry
the fact it's incomplete and don't get a "instable" trunk.
João Fernandes
On 14 August 2012 19:34, Gordon Smith wrote:
> If Flex has independent subprojects like SDK, Falcon, TLF, etc., how would
> we tie them all together to do testing? With environment variables that say
> "use this branch of the SDK, this branch of Falcon, this branch of TLF,
> etc."?
>
> - Gordon
On 8/14/2012 2:16 PM, Roland Zwaga wrote:
Gordon
What you think under trunck/falcon ?
trunk/falcon sounds reasonable to me as well.
Roland
As I understood it; the trunk is, essentially, working code for the
existing Flex SDK. Since Falcon is not yet integrated as part of the
Flex SDK; I
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Carol Frampton wrote:
> +1 except remove projects directory and put each project at top-level and
> add tags subdirectory under each project
>
>
+1, I like Carol's suggestion with João's structure.
-omar
l Frampton [mailto:cfram...@adobe.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:28 AM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Falcon location
On 8/14/12 2 :17PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>
>On 8/14/12 11:05 AM, "Gordon Smith" wrote:
>
>> I'd like to start
+1 except remove projects directory and put each project at top-level and
add tags subdirectory under each project
On 8/14/12 2 :26PM, "João Fernandes"
wrote:
>why not
>site
>external
>projects
SDK
> >>> branches
> >>> trunk
> >>> whiteboard
Falcon
> >>> branches
>
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> And I would like us to have:
> blazeds
> external
> falcon
> import2
> site
> tlf
> sdk
> branches <-- these 3 are moved down from the top level
> tags
> trunk
> utilities
> whiteboard
On 8/14/12 2 :17PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>
>On 8/14/12 11:05 AM, "Gordon Smith" wrote:
>
>> I'd like to start a discussion of where Falcon will live in the Apache
>> repository.
>>
>> The initial donation will be an Eclipse project and Ant scripts for
>>building
>> Falcon itself. Later we
why not
site
external
projects
>>> SDK
>>> branches
>>> trunk
>>> whiteboard
>>> Falcon
>>> branches
>>> trunk
>>> whiteboard
>>> BlazeDS
>>> branches
>>> trunk
>>> whiteboard
>>> Utilities
>>> branches
>>> trunk
>>> whiteboard
>>> TLF
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/14/12 11:05 AM, "Gordon Smith" wrote:
>
> > I'd like to start a discussion of where Falcon will live in the Apache
> > repository.
> >
> > The initial donation will be an Eclipse project and Ant scripts for
> building
> > Falcon it
> On 8/14/12 11:16 AM, "Roland Zwaga" wrote:
>
>>> Gordon
>>>
>>> What you think under trunck/falcon ?
>>>
>>
>> trunk/falcon sounds reasonable to me as well.
>>
>> Roland
>
> Putting falcon under trunk means it will likely need to be blocked from the
> next release as I don't think falcon will be
On 8/14/12 11:16 AM, "Roland Zwaga" wrote:
>> Gordon
>>
>> What you think under trunck/falcon ?
>>
>
> trunk/falcon sounds reasonable to me as well.
>
> Roland
Putting falcon under trunk means it will likely need to be blocked from the
next release as I don't think falcon will be ready wi
On 8/14/12 11:05 AM, "Gordon Smith" wrote:
> I'd like to start a discussion of where Falcon will live in the Apache
> repository.
>
> The initial donation will be an Eclipse project and Ant scripts for building
> Falcon itself. Later we will donate another Eclipse project and Ant scripts
> fo
> Gordon
>
> What you think under trunck/falcon ?
>
trunk/falcon sounds reasonable to me as well.
Roland
Gordon
What you think under trunck/falcon ?
Regards
Igor Costa
www.igorcosta.com
www.igorcosta.org
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Gordon Smith wrote:
> I'd like to start a discussion of where Falcon will live in the Apache
> repository.
>
> The initial donation
I'd like to start a discussion of where Falcon will live in the Apache
repository.
The initial donation will be an Eclipse project and Ant scripts for building
Falcon itself. Later we will donate another Eclipse project and Ant scripts for
testing Falcon
Although it is Java code, I don't think
Sounds good to me.
- Gordon
-Original Message-
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 4:07 PM
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Falcon location in Apache repository
Probably the opposite falcon/trunk, similar to flex/trunk.
We'll figur
Probably the opposite falcon/trunk, similar to flex/trunk.
We'll figure out an integration strategy later. TLF will probably end up in
a similar folder. BlazeDS as well.
We can move it around later.
On 7/13/12 4:03 PM, "Gordon Smith" wrote:
> I think it will be confusing to have projects fo
I think it will be confusing to have projects for the old compiler and project
for the new compiler mingled together in the trunk/modules directory. Currently
there are two Eclipse projects, one for the Falcon compiler itself and one for
its JUnit tests. And there will be a third and possibly fo
70 matches
Mail list logo
