Hi Piotr,
I think we are getting sufficient progress I the discussion thread to still
think about a revert. I'm most for change things from this point, that
should be the normal way from 0.9.2 to 1.0. We can as well hold a bit the
release until we have cleared all this. As I said, if we revert, and
release 0.9.3 with old code, blog examples will not work at all, and that
will suppose lots of people in the internet trying us and failing.
Think that:
1) There's no breaking changes at all about functionality
2) The change was only:
a) move things from Basic to Core
b) rename packages on some of that 2.a) things
So the real problem now for me is 2.b) and that's the reason why jsonly
build is failing, since we have things in framework with not examples
referencing it, and since SWCs does not validate CSS beads, when used that
CSS in final app that fails. I think that's for me a major problem, and
will prefer to focus in find that code and fixing it.
I'm trying to focus this morning on doing this, and hope to fix on that way
jsonly
2018-05-17 10:08 GMT+02:00 Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>:
> It's not about the minor changes in his app in my opinion. In the result of
> the discussion it may end up that you will revert everything and solution
> will be completely different. What will be the experience of the created
> app on the user sight ?
>
> 2018-05-17 10:05 GMT+02:00 Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>:
>
> > Hi Harbs,
> >
> > that was returned to the old way, actually we have the same than before
> > refactor:
> >
> > import org.apache.royale.html.Group;
> >
> > public class NodeElementBase extends Group
> >
> > Maybe the problem is that we don't have any example of ButtonBar in
> > examples? and thus I was not aware of that concrete component?
> >
> > I'll try to see that and if we need, I'll create and example now for
> that.
> >
> > The change to solve this in your code base is really easy and direct:
> >
> > search all "import org.apache.royale.html.supportClasses.DataGroup;" and
> > replace with "import org.apache.royale.core.DataGroup;"
> >
> > (for me is clear that DataGroup is a Core piece, that will be used not as
> > Basic or Jewel implementation, but as a "core" piece used for the rest of
> > UI sets)
> >
> > I'll be looking at it right now
> >
> > Thanks for exposing it! :)
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> >
> >
> > 2018-05-17 8:49 GMT+02:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Having trouble getting this email to “take”. Trying a paste link
> > instead...
> > >
> > > It looks like it does have issues.
> > >
> > > I just pulled the 0.9.3 branch.
> > >
> > > I get a lot of these warnings when I compile the framework:
> > > https://paste.apache.org/Wy9t <https://paste.apache.org/Wy9t>
> > >
> > > I used it to compile my app, and I get runtime errors due to missing
> > > components. This seems to be due to HTML not subclassing Group.
> > >
> > > Here’s an example of elements which go AWAL:
> > > https://paste.apache.org/s9og <https://paste.apache.org/s9og>
> > >
> > > Everything below “ul" is missing.
> > >
> > > Harbs
> > >
> > > > On May 16, 2018, at 10:45 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID
> > > <mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm pretty sure the branches were cut before the changes in question.
> > > You can pull down the branches and build them to verify. Or look at
> > their
> > > history on GitHub.
> > > >
> > > > Om, did you see a date for when Maven SCM would be released? The
> only
> > > response I got from the Maven folks was to build Maven SCM from
> sources.
> > > If it is going to be more than a week, I might actually try that.
> > > >
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
