I am an initial committer for Flex, my iCLA has been filed. Please create
an @apache.org account for me, I would like the user id iwo.
Thanks,
Iwo Banas
Hi Guys,
I think that the crucial question here is how we handle version control.
For a simple bugfix committing to "trunk" and voting or submitting a
patch are OK.
The problem is how we handle bigger chunks of work like mentioned TabNavigator?
I'm all for collaboration from the very beginning of
Exactly!
But here comes the interfaces gotcha: to benefit from interfaces you
can't just add a huge interface for every class,
you have to define minimal, simple and implementation independent
interfaces and ensure that different part of the framework are
communicating using these interfaces.
The
The Flex framework is a big beast but from my experience whichever
part you pick it can be optimized :-)
The biggest issue with StyleManager is scalability, it's fast for
small toy projects and simple examples but terribly slow for huge
applications.The problem is that styles processing times grow
Whatever formatting tool we use we should always make sure to separate
reformatting from actual code change. It's a nightmare to review a 3 line
bugfix when the patch contains 300 lines with formatting changes.
When we agree on the codding standards and Adobe commits the code it would
be worth to
+1
> I would go as far as to suggest that the first Apache Flex release should
> equivalent in code to the current Adobe Flex 4.6 release.
We can even keep the version as Apache Flex 4.6 to avoid the impression
that we are releasing some new features.
Cheers,
Iwo Banas
> I understand the "spirit" behind it, but I think there is so much to do
right now, that putting some of "our" ressources in a "symbolic" release
would not be a good first step in our new era.
I don't consider this to be a "symbolic" release. It's more the release
exercise and setting a baseline
That's great to see the first "real" work being started straight away!
However I still think that we should release the first baseline
version reflecting Adobe Flex 4.6 code with only cosmetic
modifications. It wouldn't make sense to rush such an important
feature (Navigators) just to get the rele
> I've never been a fan of highly detailed coding conventions. For example, I
> could care less if you use tab or space. Any modern editor can configure
> its tab width. I do care that a tab is four spaces though and want you to
> set your editor up that way.
I'm not fanatic about codding conve
+1 (binding)
Cheers,
Iwo Banas
On 16 January 2012 12:13, Rui Silva wrote:
> But, yes, it would be interesting if people just scanned the framework for
> unused code and post those here so they can be validated by people with
> more knowledge and an eventual elimination of that code could stem from
> that.
I don't think there w
On 16 January 2012 15:22, Martin Heidegger wrote:
>
> interface IContext {
> function get robotlegs_core_destroyed(): Boolean;
> }
>
> because some other interface might have another getter for "destroyed" of
> which the robotlegs team
> doesn't know in advance.
Method overloading is not a silve
On 16 January 2012 15:45, Martin Heidegger wrote:
> The descriptive long names such as sendString are funny as long as they are
> short. I have had occasions
> where I wanted to differ between a complex object and a string
> representation: sendString(), sendQuery(), then there were two totally
>
On 16 January 2012 22:19, Michel Boudreau wrote:
> I don't really see the reason to have Signals added to Flex, especially if
> it's already possible to just add it as a separate library.
I totally agree. Not that I don't like Signals but I like having choice.
Rather than deciding which libraries
Rick, Sorry if I offended you by comparing Signals to Cairngorm ;-)
On 16 January 2012 22:56, Rick Winscot wrote:
> Seriously though - more choices does not mean better. More choices just means
> more choices.
I agree, my point is that without competition between different
solutions (IoC framewo
On Jan 18, 2012 6:17 PM, "Brent Arnold" wrote:
> So is the rest of the community unable to vote? Seeing how we didn't
elect the PPMC members, I don't see it being very fair to exclude the rest
of us from voting on something that will represent the community.
Surely it won't be "fair" but I can't
ID 04: 1pt
ID 29: 1pts
ID 42: 3pt
(Binding)
Cheers,
Iwo
+1 #42
{binding}
Cheers,
Iwo
+1 e) green logo
[Binding]
Cheers,
Iwo
On Feb 20, 2012 1:21 PM, "Michael A. Labriola"
wrote:
> I am not going to hold my breath on this, but the way to avoid this would
be to have adobe host a minimal-sized, signed rsl, that contained our
hashes. Then we have the hashes with a level of confidence.
Can't the hashes of all used librarie
[Binding]
> 1) Keep the current package names in the first Apache Flex release 4.8
+1
> 2) Change the package names in the first major Apache release 5
-1
Cheers,
Iwo Banas
21 matches
Mail list logo
