Hi Alex, El lun., 26 nov. 2018 a las 1:53, Alex Harui (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) escribió:
> We (the Royale project) told Alina that we thought it was feasible to have > her migrate her app by September. This was before you started your effort, > and you did not ask for opinions of other PMC members before you engaged > your client. It is now November, almost December. We are way behind > schedule. > I think you're not following my reasoning, maybe cause it doesn't like you, but is difficult to follow a discussion if you switch completely the subject. That is "you made a change that broke things and are asking me to invest my time or my money to solve that". But ok, about this assert. first, my effort with Jewel is the requisite to my migration, so I started long time ago before Alina appears on this list. Many time. But I don't think that's the point, since Alina, like myself, both and many others has the same importance to make their migration and to work on Royale. This doesn't have anything with the current issue. I as well tried to help Alina, in things like MX RO, and I'm paying the current efforts to fix the actual issues, without that MX ROs are unusable. So what said all of this about the actual problem....almost nothing...we just are wasting resources in writing those emails, in my opinion, since the current issue is not addressed. > > The change I made was discussed to fix a complaint by others. Ok, are you saying that only others complains are valid (people pursuing MX/SPARK), and my complain of your changes breaking things and not (since I'm using only a subset of MX and the new JEWEL lib) ? IMHO, wanting to help on fixing that or at least give guidance on how to solve it are the way to go. > You are reverting that fix, returning others to a problem. I'm making a change in a commit marked to be reverted in the comment (so temporal), so we can continue working and requesting a better solution. You ask for the same to many of us, why we can ask you the same? > What technical flaw do you find in the changes I made? I spend Saturday morning trying to add to Royale-config file MXRoyale.swc for SWF and JS and namespace. This doesn't work. So I'm asking you, why not? if you know how to do it, why don't provide and example? With that I can create a "jewel-config" file that has Jewel and MX for example, so we all have what we want. > Just because something isn't working for you in an un-explained way > doesn't mean that you can go break others just to fix your problem. But I explained why is not working several times now right? don't say the change is not valid, just say that is breaking IDEs and you should listen and try to help instead of not recognizing the problem. > I am not making changes for myself, I am making changes for others. Can > you make the same claim? > Sure. My changes although are for me, are as well for many others. And very needed. Just the latest things I did or payed for if you're not aware: * Fixing debugger so we can debug MXML (done by Josh) * Debugging code in other libraries of a project far beyond app project with source maps (done by Josh) * Fix MX RemoteObject to transfer complex graphs to and from royale (done by Greg) * Fix MX RemoteObject to use ArrayCollections (done by Greg) * Fix for MX Producer and Consumer classes (done by Greg, currently in WIP but near completion) * Fix for MX CurrencyFormatter (done by me) Other things like my investment in provide a new UI set that works completely and have a nice UI and responsive capabilities is already known. Those points are main ones, but there's so much more on the works on fixing things here and there. Can we concentrate in see how to solve the problem instead of trying to validate our positions? Thanks in advance for your help on this Carlos > > -Alex > > On 11/25/18, 3:49 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: > > Alex, > > "you shouldn't make everyone else pay a price to save you time" > > For me this seems what you did, why don't put yourself in the skin of > others? > > "You didn't need to make that change in the repo, you could have > worked off > a branch" > > Saying that Is again the same, if you break a think but you think you > must > break that in pro of what you're pursuing, why you ask others to make a > branch? is more special the change you want to make than the changes of > others? > > Apache way is where all are equals, and try to pursue a common > objetive, > but in this case, don't know others, but I clearly don't know what you > want > to do, but are you asking me to fix that or spend money paying others > to do > something I still don't know the objective. > > Simply don't understand that position. > > I have a clearly dead line this Friday to show a client our progress > in our > Apache Royale real application. Do you have some dead line as well > that I'm > not aware that explain to be so inflexible with this issue? I mean in > order > to try to understand you position. > > > > > > > > El lun., 26 nov. 2018 a las 0:36, Carlos Rovira (< > carlosrov...@apache.org>) > escribió: > > > Hi Alex, > > > > don't think that's a good attitude. I'm just trying to solve a thing > > broken in the repo, and proposing a change. You essentially did a > change > > that break things, and you're not taking care of the side effects of > doing > > that. I'm already paying other people to fix things, but I don't > think I > > have pay someone to fix something you broke. When I break thinks I > use to > > try to help as much as I can, remember when I change many files and > people > > report breaking things, I was some days helping and spending hours > to fix > > things for others, since I considere I'm responsible of my changes. > I'm now > > trying to fix a things you break, and made a change that solves it. > You > > think is not ok, but I don't know what's your goal, and why you did > that > > change, but you're asking me to spend hours in deal with a change > you did. > > Simply don't understand that position. > > > > Remember that I said in my previous email that I already spend > yesterday > > complete morning to deal with you change, I can't get nothing that > solve. > > You know what try to do, why don't you take care of my suggestion > and help > > to create a config file that addresses the problem so you and I can > > continue out work? > > > > > > > > > > > > El dom., 25 nov. 2018 a las 23:28, Alex Harui > (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) > > escribió: > > > >> By putting all SWCs back in the library-path in royale-config, you > have > >> re-introduced a problem I was fixing. You can say you didn't > revert the > >> actual git commit, but your changes essentially undid my commit. > The build > >> passed with my commit, as far as I can tell. IF we all start > reverting > >> stuff we don't like, we'll just end up in a revert war. We are all > in a > >> time-crunch, not just you. This is cutting-edge development. > Things may > >> get in your way some times, but you shouldn't make everyone else > pay a > >> price to save you time. You didn't need to make that change in the > repo, > >> you could have worked off a branch. If you run into a bug, you'll > have to > >> take the time to investigate or hire someone to do it if none of > the other > >> volunteers happen to have time. > >> > >> My 2 cents, > >> -Alex > >> > >> On 11/25/18, 1:56 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Alex, > >> > >> El dom., 25 nov. 2018 a las 8:34, Alex Harui > >> (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) > >> escribió: > >> > >> > Does configname make any difference in your IDE? Maybe the > IDE > >> doesn't > >> > support it. The compiler output should switch to saying it is > >> loading > >> > flex-config instead of royale-config. > >> > > >> > > >> I think there's tow ways, one using addtiionalCompiler options > like I > >> show. > >> Another from the AS3&MXML extension is "config: royale" or > "config: > >> flex" > >> (values can be as well "air", and others) > >> > >> > >> > The change you made to royale-config-template re-introduces > the > >> problem I > >> > was trying to fix. IMO, you should make a local change in a > branch > >> instead > >> > of reverting my commits. > >> > > >> > >> I didn't revert your commit, just do a new one to be reverted, > since > >> it > >> seems to be something goes wrong with the changes. For your > words I > >> understand there's no bugs or things to take care to solve this? > >> > >> > >> > I recommend that you compare the set of manifests loaded by > >> flex-config vs > >> > royale-config. It looks like some are missing. And you are > >> welcome to > >> > make another config.xml for your combination. The problem > with > >> having > >> > "everything" in a -config.xml is that it can add too many > options to > >> > code-hinting. > >> > > >> > >> Ok, the problem is that I spend yesterday morning trying to see > >> something > >> similar but only the actual patch worked. > >> I tried to add to royale config the MXRoyale.swc for SWF and JS > and > >> namespace, but that didn't make a difference. Do you know > what's the > >> problem starting from that point? or if the approach is not > that? > >> > >> I think I can create one for Jewel applications, and remove > from that > >> sets > >> that are just experiments but not usable like createjs, flat, > express > >> More over, could revert my change and create a > >> "jewel-config-template.xml" > >> to test that is possible? I was not able to do it yesterday so > maybe > >> there's a problem and is not possible right now > >> > >> I'll be out until today until night, and will catch up if you > commit > >> something to try it. I understand that would be using > >> addtionalcompiler > >> options path with +configname > >> > >> Another thing that could be good is the one you already > commented > >> about > >> separate MXRoyale in MX Rpc, Formatters, and more, to help in > this > >> way to > >> code intelligence in IDEs to have only the right libraries the > users > >> is > >> using > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> Carlos > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > HTH, > >> > -Alex > >> > > >> > > >> > On 11/24/18, 7:04 AM, "Carlos Rovira" < > carlosrov...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > after doing full rebuild I'm finding a problem in IDE > (not in > >> build) > >> > with > >> > the new change +configname=flex > >> > > >> > - we are using Jewel and MXRoyale, just por MX RPC (and > maybe > >> some > >> > other > >> > class in MX). > >> > - we are using several libraries and one application > >> > > >> > today I found that all MX code throws error in VS Code > and is > >> not > >> > recognize. I see the change about configname. To adapt our > >> config > >> > project > >> > to this, I added to each asconfig file in all royale libs > and > >> app in > >> > our > >> > project the line > >> > > >> > "additionalOptions": "+configname=flex" > >> > > >> > but this doesn't solves the problem > >> > > >> > in fact I'm seeing more problems like > >> > > >> > In initializer for 'j:icon', type > >> org.apache.royale.icons.FontIcon is > >> > not > >> > assignable to target type 'org.apache.royale.core.IIcon'. > >> > Implicit coercion of a value with static type MouseEvent > to a > >> possibly > >> > unrelated type MouseEvent. > >> > In initializer for 'j:previousButton', type > >> > org.apache.royale.jewel.Group > >> > is not assignable to target type > >> 'org.apache.royale.core.UIBase'. > >> > Ambiguous reference to MouseEvent > >> > > >> > and many more > >> > > >> > This makes hundreds of errors and makes the IDE unusable. > I > >> suppose > >> > that > >> > this change not block people waning to use a mix of > libraries, > >> and is > >> > just > >> > a matter to know how to update configuration, right? I > mean if > >> someone > >> > wants to use in the same application three different > buttons( > >> jewel, > >> > basic, > >> > and mx/spark), that should still be possible right? > >> > > >> > What should I do in my project configuration to solve > this > >> problem? > >> > > >> > thanks > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Carlos Rovira > >> > > >> > > >> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb7e385d10cee49de88de08d653309558%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636787865492987762&sdata=hjOwZj7r7CCaqRQwXK%2FN6SayOpHLxdk1bkTvPZptPAw%3D&reserved=0 > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> -- > >> Carlos Rovira > >> > >> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb7e385d10cee49de88de08d653309558%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636787865492987762&sdata=hjOwZj7r7CCaqRQwXK%2FN6SayOpHLxdk1bkTvPZptPAw%3D&reserved=0 > >> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb7e385d10cee49de88de08d653309558%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636787865492987762&sdata=hjOwZj7r7CCaqRQwXK%2FN6SayOpHLxdk1bkTvPZptPAw%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb7e385d10cee49de88de08d653309558%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636787865492987762&sdata=hjOwZj7r7CCaqRQwXK%2FN6SayOpHLxdk1bkTvPZptPAw%3D&reserved=0 > > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
