> I've still have the minor (?) issues: Just to be clear, I ran the installer from the build done from the source kit and had no issues in installing the Flex SDK itself, only FlexJS, that's why I don't know it I have to attribute the issue to the Installer or FlexJS.
For the tool bar, it is minor IMO even though that looks not pro (especially from us). Frédéric THOMAS ---------------------------------------- > From: webdoubl...@hotmail.com > To: dev@flex.apache.org > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.2 RC2 > Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 16:19:15 +0100 > > Hold on, > > I've still have the minor (?) issues: > > - The tool bar for some steps goes beyond its container limits. > - I've tried twice to download the nightly FlexJS SDK and had Error #3003: > File or directory does not exist, actually > D:\SDKs\FlexJS\nightly_PF16.0_AIR16.0_en_US\js\lib\google\closure-compiler\compiler.jar > is not there, is that a minor temp issue ? > > main: > > copyfiles: > [copy] Copying 0 files to > D:\SDKs\FlexJS\nightly_PF16.0_AIR16.0_en_US/ant/lib > [copy] Copying 14 files to > D:\SDKs\FlexJS\nightly_PF16.0_AIR16.0_en_US/bin > > bin-legacy: > [copy] Copying 11 files to > D:\SDKs\FlexJS\nightly_PF16.0_AIR16.0_en_US/lib > [copy] Copying 1 file to > D:\SDKs\FlexJS\nightly_PF16.0_AIR16.0_en_US\lib\mxmlc.jar > [copy] Copying 15 files to > D:\SDKs\FlexJS\nightly_PF16.0_AIR16.0_en_US/lib/external > > copy.jx.lib: > [mkdir] Created directory > D:\SDKs\FlexJS\nightly_PF16.0_AIR16.0_en_US\js\lib\google\closure-compiler > [copy] Copying 1 file to > D:\SDKs\FlexJS\nightly_PF16.0_AIR16.0_en_US\js\lib\google\closure-compiler\compiler.jar > Error #3003 > > Frédéric THOMAS > > > ---------------------------------------- >> From: aha...@adobe.com >> To: webdoubl...@hotmail.com; dev@flex.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.2 RC2 >> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 15:14:25 +0000 >> >> I think enough folks have examined the source but it would be good to know >> that it works in other countries >> >> >> Sent from my LG G3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone >> >> >> ------ Original message------ >> >> From: Frédéric THOMAS >> >> Date: Mon, Jun 22, 2015 7:25 AM >> >> To: dev@flex.apache.org; >> >> Subject:RE: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.2 RC2 >> >> >>> You're right. Let's count the votes and move on. >> >> I was about to dedicate some time to test it but if you have already enough >> votes, I'm fine with :-) >> >> Thanks, >> Frédéric THOMAS >> >> >> ---------------------------------------- >>> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 15:58:04 +0200 >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.2 RC2 >>> From: e...@ixsoftware.nl >>> To: dev@flex.apache.org >>> >>> Alex, >>> >>> You're right. Let's count the votes and move on. >>> >>> Contributions in the form of actual patches or even constructive comments >>> are always welcome and will certainly be part of the next release (which >>> everyone is free to create and put to a vote, btw). Just let's not let them >>> interfere with the momentum the project has been having lately. >>> >>> Thank you for shepherding this release! >>> >>> EdB >>> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, June 22, 2015, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 6/22/15, 1:03 AM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com >>>> <javascript:;>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ix Multimedia Software >>> >>> Jan Luykenstraat 27 >>> 3521 VB Utrecht >>> >>> T. 06-51952295 >>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl<http://www.ixsoftware.nl> >> >
