On 6/22/15, 1:03 AM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >You suggested change corrects one the issues. The other one is you can >set AIR_HOME to a 4.0 SDK, but if FLEX_HOME contains an air version other >than 4.0 it will fail to compile. It will still fail to compile if you >change the namespace. > >> And since it is a minor change, we wouldn't need another round of voting >> for this change or we could simply carry the current votes forward. > >Fine by me. I don’t think anyone would have an issue to carry votes >forward for just a read me change. Don’t get me wrong: making it easier to compile the source package is a legitimate issue. But what I don’t get is why it helps the community more to focus time and effort on another RC vs taking the same time and effort on moving, for example, FlexJS further along. How does expending energy on this issue help the community more, or put the foundation at risk, or encourage participation instead of scaring away potential future release managers. Why is delaying the release for this issue more important than having N more people experience installation failures because they don’t have their IE settings right? I’m all for someone taking the time to upgrade the build script to update the -app.xml to maybe pull the namespace number from, maybe, flex-sdk-description.xml so it always uses what folks have in their SDK. And then that will go in a future release. IMO, folks who feel strongly about this issue should go work on that. I want to get this release out so we can see if our failure rate changes significantly, and try to create new markets for Flex with FlexJS. Thanks, -Alex
