for me that's ok Piotr too thanks
2018-05-17 10:30 GMT+02:00 Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>: > Carlos, > > Those changes were not properly discussed. Let's wait till the end of the > discussion and proper fix. I personally prefer wait even another month than > release something what can change significantly. > > Is that make sense to others ? > > Thanks, Piotr > > 2018-05-17 10:26 GMT+02:00 Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>: > > > Hi, > > > > just find the imports with problems, fix them and committed. If there's > no > > others this should fix the release. > > > > If you see the commit, the changes are easy, and no more of some secs to > do > > for our users, in case they use this core classes. > > > > Let's see what Jenkins reports in the following build > > > > > > 2018-05-17 10:16 GMT+02:00 Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>: > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > 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
