That's fine. I would like to migrate the "How to use FlexJS with Flash Builder" to royale-docs at some point, maybe during the next release vote. Thoughts on where it should go?
-Alex On 1/31/18, 9:03 AM, "Andrew Wetmore" <cottag...@gmail.com> wrote: >For now I will add a passage along these lines: > >"If you are using an IDE such as Blah or Blah, it will create the standard >folder structure for you when you create a Royale project. If you are >working outside of an IDE, and perhaps using command-line instruction to >compile your code, here is how to structure your project." > >On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:21 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> >wrote: > >> Yes, good question. It doesn’t take sense to me to explain how to use >> each IDE in the tutorial, so I left it oriented to command-line/NPM >>which >> I think will be how you are set up after following the Get >> Started/Download sections. >> >> Maybe GetStarted should have other Get Started With Moonshine, Get >>Started >> with VSCode, Get Started with Flash Builder, and we can also write >> separate Tutorial with Moonshine, Tutorial with Moonshine, Tutorial with >> Flash Builder sections? >> >> Up to you, really. >> >> My 2 cents, >> -Alex >> >> On 1/31/18, 7:41 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >Andrew, >> > >> >Great question. Each IDE have different approach. I'm talking about >>both >> >which fully supports Royale Moonshine and VSCode. Moonshine create >>basic >> >folder structure. >> >Instruction should refer maybe to both IDEs in case of creation. >> > >> >There is also Maven way of creating structures for Hello World >> >application. >> >Everything is here [1] >> > >> >[1] >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= >> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co >> >m%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Fwiki%2FQuick-Start&data=02% >> 7C01%7Caharui%40adob >> >e.com%7Cd4d0d10e47aa407fb2ff08d568c12b99%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c3 >> 0bf >> >4%7C0%7C0%7C636530101227203024&sdata=KnVQ2J02MT1QWgY9QGa8Jrbc% >> 2BlGggynn5Gt >> >gp9EuV6A%3D&reserved=0 >> > >> >Thanks, Piotr >> > >> > >> >2018-01-31 16:10 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore <cottag...@gmail.com>: >> > >> >> Here's one question right away. I read this instruction: >> >> >> >> "Let's say you are creating a project called MyFirstRoyaleApp. >>Create a >> >> MyFirstRoyaleApp folder and in it create a folder named "src" and put >> >>your >> >> source code in there. If you do that, the compiler will put the >>output >> >>in >> >> a "bin" folder"." >> >> >> >> However, my experience working with IDEs is that, if they support >> >>Royale, >> >> they know to build the standard file structure as soon as I create a >>new >> >> project, without my having to do it. Is the instruction for people >>who >> >>are >> >> going the command-line route, rather than using an IDE? If so, we >>should >> >> say so. >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 10:53 AM, Yishay Weiss >><yishayj...@hotmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > This looks very promising. I’m going to read this in batches. Some >> >> > feedback on ‘The data model’. >> >> > >> >> > repos = configurator.data.repos; >> >> > projectName = configurator.data.projectName; >> >> > >> >> > Shouldn’t these be cast to a String and an Array respectively? >> >> > >> >> > Also, I find these lines a bit misleading >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > <js:HTTPService id="commitsService" /> >> >> > >> >> > import org.apache.royale.events.Event; >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Since some of the viewers will be first timers I think it’s >>important >> >>to >> >> > put code in script blocks. >> >> > >> >> > Also, related to the last comment can you make the full source for >>the >> >> > example available somewhere? >> >> > >> >> > Thanks. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > From: Alex Harui<mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >> >> > Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 8:50 AM >> >> > To: dev@royale.apache.org<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> >> >> > Subject: Re: Royale in 10 minutes (was Re: Proposed table of >>contents >> >>for >> >> > Royale help documentation) >> >> > >> >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > I've pushed what I will call a first draft of the main portion of a >> >> > tutorial for using Royale. >> >> > >> >> > See: >> >> > >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= >> http%3A%2F%2Fapacheroy >> >>aleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com%3A8080%2Fjob%2F& >> data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40 >> >>adobe.com%7Cd4d0d10e47aa407fb2ff08d568c12b99% >> 7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23 >> >>>>c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636530101227203024&sdata=Fq1N60QjsvD1GcKQrmkIlAvDaF3PE >>>>o >> r >> >>HalaPaaNa6nU%3D&reserved=0 >> >> > RoyaleDocs_Stagin >> >> > g/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/_site/create-an- >> >> > application/application-tuto >> >> > rial.html >> >> > >> >> > Feedback welcome. Looks like it might be more than 10 minutes, >>but it >> >> was >> >> > an interesting look through what Royale can and can't do. >> >> > >> >> > A few things I thought of: >> >> > -DataGrid in Express should probably default to using percentage >> >>column >> >> > sizes. Then the apps will be "responsive" by default. >> >> > -If DataGrid could handle plain Array, it would save a few lines in >> >>the >> >> > tutorial. >> >> > -Should this example look better out of the box? Different >>borders or >> >> > something like that? >> >> > >> >> > Other than responding to feedback on the tutorial, I am going to >>fill >> >>out >> >> > the application-structure page then move on to ASDoc. So folks are >> >>free >> >> > to just make changes to the .md files to improve the tutorial. I >> >>think >> >> > that may close out my week. If I can make ASDoc work a little >>better >> >>and >> >> > the tutorial is "ok" (not necessarily great or perfect), it might >>be a >> >> > good time to cut another release early next week. >> >> > >> >> > Thoughts? >> >> > -Alex >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On 1/26/18, 12:32 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >>wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >On 1/26/18, 11:43 AM, "Andrew Wetmore" <cottag...@gmail.com> >>wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > >>I don't think we need to build out the full ToC up front, rather >> >>than >> >> > >>PAYG >> >> > >>haha. There are tons of pages that I have not yet listed in the >> >>Google >> >> > >>doc, >> >> > >>and several decisions we have to make. >> >> > >> >> >> > >>For example, we have an Express set of controls and MDL and who >> >>knows >> >> > >>what >> >> > >>else. I presume we need to explain how these various sets of >> >>controls >> >> > >>relate to each other... >> >> > > >> >> > >Yes, and it also occurred to me that we need to discuss targets >>(SWF >> >> > >output and/or JS output) and how to manage that. And keep in mind >> >>that >> >> > >someday there may be a third or fourth output. >> >> > > >> >> > >My 2 cents, >> >> > >-Alex >> >> > >> >> >> > >>On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 1:09 PM, Alex Harui >> >><aha...@adobe.com.invalid> >> >> > >>wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> > >>> Hi Andrew, >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> Responses in-line. >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> On 1/26/18, 2:48 AM, "Andrew Wetmore" <cottag...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >Good morning. >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> >Least thing first: Does the Apache header absolutely need to >>be >> >>in >> >> > >>>short >> >> > >>> >lines with hard line breaks so it takes up so much vertical >> >>space in >> >> > >>>the >> >> > >>> >file? Please look at test-apache-header.md and see whether the >> >> header >> >> > >>> laid >> >> > >>> >out on fewer lines and trusting to line wrapping works. >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> I don't know for sure. There is a header scanning tool that we >> >>use >> >> and >> >> > >>>I >> >> > >>> just tried it and it didn't mind your reformatting, so that's >>good >> >> > >>>enough >> >> > >>> for me. >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> >I am fine with your suggestions about where "Hello, World" >> >>should be >> >> > >>>and >> >> > >>> >how "Developing an application" might play out. However, this >> >>does >> >> > >>>raise >> >> > >>> >the question of whether this sort of help-docs structure is >> >>going to >> >> > >>>have >> >> > >>> >an index or other means to locate concepts like "data binding" >> >>if it >> >> > >>>is >> >> > >>> >tucked down in a larger set of instructions about applications >> >> rather >> >> > >>>than >> >> > >>> >being a entry itself. >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> IMO, the 10-minute tutorial won't go into any serious detail >>about >> >> data >> >> > >>> binding, so "data binding" would have its own section wherever >>it >> >> makes >> >> > >>> sense and a link to it from the tutorial. >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> >I think the doc structure is still highly fluid and that we >>need >> >>to >> >> > >>>either >> >> > >>> >hold off on the ToC until we are closer to alpha-release of >>the >> >> > >>> >documentation, or have a less-bulky ToC document. My rough >> >>estimate >> >> is >> >> > >>> >that >> >> > >>> >we have stubs for less than 10% of the pages we will >>eventually >> >> have. >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> IMO, the toc.json is relatively compact and much easier to >>change. >> >> I'm >> >> > >>> not sure how to make it any smaller. I could probably sit down >> >>and >> >> > >>>crank >> >> > >>> out all of the missing stubs in an evening, but is it worth >>it? I >> >> like >> >> > >>> the fact that entries don't show up until we create a page for >> >>them. >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> My 2 cents, >> >> > >>> -Alex >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> >On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 4:40 AM, Alex Harui >> >> <aha...@adobe.com.invalid >> >> > > >> >> > >>> >wrote: >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> >> Hi Andrew, >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> I took a quick peek at the Adobe doc. I'm not sure >> >>"Development >> >> > >>>Phases" >> >> > >>> >> should be the first thing under "Create an application", >> >> especially >> >> > >>> >>given >> >> > >>> >> how the Adobe doc says that some of those sub-topics are not >> >> phases. >> >> > >>> >> Also, I think there is more than one way to develop an >> >> application. >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> My temptation is to leave "Hello, World" as the end of the >>"Get >> >> > >>>Started" >> >> > >>> >> section. Getting "Hello World" to work will prove that you >> >>have >> >> > >>> >>properly >> >> > >>> >> installed the SDK. Then, I would like to suggest tweaking >>the >> >> > >>>"Create >> >> > >>> >>An >> >> > >>> >> Application" section to be where we build an app in 10 >> >>minutes. I >> >> > >>>think >> >> > >>> >> we should start with "Application Structure" I will discuss >> >>the >> >> MVC >> >> > >>> >> pattern there as an option. Then the next section would be >> >>called >> >> > >>> >> something like "A (10 Minute) Tutorial" and the sub-topics >> >>will be >> >> > >>>major >> >> > >>> >> steps towards building an example app. It will take you >> >>through >> >> > >>> >>building >> >> > >>> >> the UI, network access, maybe data-binding, and it will >>address >> >> > >>> >>building, >> >> > >>> >> debugging, and deploying the example. It will pick up >>enough >> >>of >> >> the >> >> > >>> >> development phase information that I don't think we'll need >>a >> >> > >>>separate >> >> > >>> >> section for it. >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> I'm shutting down for tonight so I'll see what your thoughts >> >>are >> >> > >>>when I >> >> > >>> >> get going again. I could also draft my version in a branch >>if >> >>you >> >> > >>>don't >> >> > >>> >> want to mess with the develop branch right now. >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> Thoughts? >> >> > >>> >> -Alex >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> >-- >> >> > >>> >Andrew Wetmore >> >> > >>> > >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= >> >> > http%3A%2F%2Fcottage >> >> > >>>>1 >> >> > >>>>4 >> >> > >>> . >> >> > >>> >blogspot.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com% >> >> > >>> 7Cfc7c34f4df27449408cf08 >> >> > >>> >d564aa6bd1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0% >> >> > >>> 7C636525605481253150 >> >> > >>> >>>&sdata=gbSwjy2OMLy72u6Jna41ySDuPFO0K5tsjEV7ZZLnEo4%3D&reserved=0 >> >> > >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >>-- >> >> > >>Andrew Wetmore >> >> > >> >> >> > >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= >> >> > http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14 >> >> > >>. >> >> > >>blogspot.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com% >> >> > 7Ccd4e8ea7ad2844405a790 >> >> > >>8 >> >> > >>d564f50ec9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0% >> >> > 7C63652592603466017 >> >> > >>7 >> >> > >>&sdata=QZrNY2%2BwdrY%2FZ48rnKTpAN79N9g7q%2Bn% >> >> 2BvmQPsHvrrSc%3D&reserved=0 >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Andrew Wetmore >> >> >> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= >> http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14 >> >>.blogspot.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com% >> 7Cd4d0d10e47aa407fb2ff >> >>08d568c12b99%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c3 >> 0bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636530101227203 >> >>>>024&sdata=MEeyz7seKet116bxyYFxCpY5L1P%2Bo2qaOsxbsO%2BI9aE%3D&reserved=0 >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> >-- >> > >> >Piotr Zarzycki >> > >> >Patreon: >> >*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr >> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com% >> 7Cd4d0d10e47aa40 >> >7fb2ff08d568c12b99%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c3 >> 0bf4%7C0%7C0%7C6365301012 >> >27203024&sdata=364BHlYBX8IIMIbKcrBMck44yKNyrA >> i%2BYW%2BLJwDCQcs%3D&reserved >> >=0 >> ><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr >> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com% >> 7Cd4d0d10e47aa40 >> >7fb2ff08d568c12b99%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c3 >> 0bf4%7C0%7C0%7C6365301012 >> >27203024&sdata=364BHlYBX8IIMIbKcrBMck44yKNyrA >> i%2BYW%2BLJwDCQcs%3D&reserved >> >=0>* >> >> > > >-- >Andrew Wetmore > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14. >blogspot.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7fa2543721f3447b5e5b08 >d568cc8264%7C71f1da39c0a84d5a8d88a67b23c30bf4%7C0%7C0%7C636530149928249816 >&sdata=Gr2AhGTQ2qBN0KLcyO368Wag%2BIHzC5RmqfClQ28X%2F98%3D&reserved=0
