Hi Yishayw, right, I for that reason I said you were right. Sometimes when a refactor is done, maybe some side case is not seen at the time of doing it. That was the case for nesting in html. For that reason I do my best to solve it ASAP.
In the way I solved, now HTML works as expected and still we're maintaining the separation with Basic. I only say that we should not fear changes, since use to be for the good, and changes should involve to adapt to them. We're no in 0.9.3 to 0.9.4 and still with low user base, so, now is the time to make the changes to structure and organization we need. Alex, Peter, and others have comment in the recent past about that, and that's the reason of a change like this one. I'm doing my best to try to not break things, but only say, that in case I break something, I expect you all have patience and help me to fix it, while keeping the motivation of the changes. Regarding the motivations: Royale has many libraries that are somewhat the core. One is Core (of course) and then others orbit but are optional (Collections, Binding, Network,...) depending of your needs you link one or another. Then we have ui sets (Basic, Jewel, MDL, CreateJS, Flat,...). Until now all sets was Basic dependent. I started Jewel in that way. Then after much conversations with Alex, I see that was not the right way to go, and prefer to extend UIBase, instead of the control in Basic (in case it exits). Alex said many times that Basic was only a ui set, and as we evolve others could be developed. Now, that's real, and Jewel is no more Basic dependent. This have many advantages, the most visible is a 40% drop off in Apps file size that uses Jewel, since Basic things that never was used are there any more. Another thing is that Basic things that could mess the intended behaviour in Jewel will never happen since is not present anymore. Other is that I can develop freely Jewel without having to deal with Basic and possible things I could break to make Jewel work. That at the cost of a few little problems like we are having. But expect we solve it all, or maybe we could find one or another in the following days...at least after several days, seems there's no big problems with this refactor, only few ones. thanks for your kinky works about Jewel! :) Carls 2018-05-09 16:37 GMT+02:00 yishayw <yishayj...@hotmail.com>: > Hi Carlos, > > Just to get one thing out of the way, I changed NodeElementBase to extend > Group, not because I'm sure that's the way it should be permanently, but > because leaving your change as it was, was breaking our app which had > previously worked. > > Changes in base classes are always tricky, so I think it's a good thing > that > there's discussion and people feel obliged to voice their opinions and ask > questions. I think this should be encouraged. > > Personally, I don't feel I have a clear understanding of your motivation > here. What difference does it actually make to you which packages depend on > which? Can you give a specific example from Jewel where this makes a > difference? > > Excellent progress so far with Jewel, I think it's a difference maker. > > Yishay > > > > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/ > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
