It'll take another 10 hours or so before the Mustella VM cycles through it's jobs and completes the mobile suite. But if it passes for you, I expect no big issues ;-)
EdB On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 9:40 AM, Maurice Amsellem <maurice.amsel...@systar.com> wrote: > - Fixed and committed to develop branch last Mustella failure > (mobile/SoftKeyboard/properties/SK_StageText_Properties > SoftKeyboard_StageText_property_resizeForSoftKeyboard_false) > - fixed bug spotted by Om. > > Run ALL mobile mustella tests: PASS (except locale-sensitive tests) . > > It's good for me now. > > > Maurice > > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Maurice Amsellem [mailto:maurice.amsel...@systar.com] > Envoyé : mardi 19 novembre 2013 01:47 > À : dev@flex.apache.org > Objet : RE: [dev] Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_mustella-mobile #369 > > Got it: > > In Mustella FakeSoftKeyboard.as , line #71: > > if (!(comp.needsSoftKeyboard || > getQualifiedClassName(comp).indexOf("StyleableStageText") > 0)) > return; > > :-( > > Maurice > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Maurice Amsellem [mailto:maurice.amsel...@systar.com] > Envoyé : mardi 19 novembre 2013 00:39 > À : dev@flex.apache.org > Objet : RE: [dev] Build failed in Jenkins: flex-sdk_mustella-mobile #369 > > FYI, I am still struggling with the last Mutella failure: > > mobile/SoftKeyboard/properties/SK_StageText_Properties > SoftKeyboard_StageText_property_resizeForSoftKeyboard_false: > Failed DispatchMouseEvent(body:step 10) Timeout waiting for > softKeyboardActivate from navigator.activeView.notes > > It's a little bit tricky, I hope to be done soon. > > Maurice > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : lundi 18 novembre 2013 > 20:47 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: [dev] Build failed in Jenkins: > flex-sdk_mustella-mobile #369 > > > > On 11/18/13 11:19 AM, "Maurice Amsellem" <maurice.amsel...@systar.com> > wrote: >> >>So does the old StyleableStageText really have less memory requirement >>even in that case? Not so sure... > I don't know the code that well, but my understanding is that, if you don't > have popups, you can save on memory. But is it enough to matter? I don't > know enough to have an opinion. > >> >>----- >>That being said, we still need to keep the class, at least because it >>may have been overridden by folks (Om says so) , and I am not against >>keeping a few mustella tests like you suggested, to make sure it does >>not break in a future version of AIR. >>Will you help me select the ones that we need to keep? > I don't know the code well enough to help. You saw which tests broke, you > can take a few minutes to get an idea of which one or two will hit common but > important code paths and keep those. >> >>>There may be some other things you can do to the TextField-based skins >>>(masks, blends, >>>filters) that we might want to keep that around as well. >>Agree for the use case. >>But it seems like the TextField-based skin does not behave correctly on >>mobile (soft keyboard/autoCorrect not working, etc.) In this case, I >>would take another approach: >>With the new ScrollableStageText, you can use any DisplayObject as the >>proxy, not only a bitmap (see other thread). >>so we could derive a new class that would use TextField as the proxy >>(and pass it all the font styles). >>So of course, the filters won't be applied during editing, but that's a >>common usage. > It's not clear to me that's why folks use TextField. I'd say we don't do > anything regarding TextField and wait for someone to complain. I think what > you've done so far sounds great but I'm not sure more work for TextField will > have the same payoff. > > -Alex > -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
