I just created the first pass on "Welcome/Get Started/Development tools", where I hope to list the IDEs that support Royale. I would think "How to use FlexJS with Flash Builder" should be in the "Get Started" folder, with a link from the "Development tools" page.
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 1:44 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote: > 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 > > -- Andrew Wetmore http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
