Not sure what you mean by “us”. If you mean Royale, we I guess we can’t include it because it does not have compatible licensing.
If you mean your company, I don’t know why you can’t wrap it and use it in a Royale app. Harbs > On Jul 8, 2019, at 5:21 PM, Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Josh, > > IMHO, Greensock seems not to be the best option for us, so if others don't > say the oposite we can discard it. And Web Animations API or Popmotion Pure > seems the best options we have > > Web Animations API seems to be ALv2 [1] > Popmotion seems to be MIT [2] > > [1] https://github.com/web-animations/web-animations-js > [2] > https://github.com/Popmotion/popmotion/blob/master/packages/popmotion-pose/LICENSE.md > > > > > El lun., 8 jul. 2019 a las 15:42, Josh Tynjala (<[email protected]>) > escribió: > >> Greensock's source code is available, but it is not a standard open source >> license. They require a commercial license if your project meets certain >> conditions. >> >> https://greensock.com/standard-license >> >> - Josh >> >> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019, 4:36 AM Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> one thing I'm investigating in parallel among other things is about how >> to >>> make animations easy in Royale. >>> We have already some infrastructure in the Effects.swc, but this library >>> has the great point to be very oriented >>> to Royale with beads and although I didn't tried in SWF, I suppose is >>> working for Royale JS and SWF. >>> >>> In the other hand there's other great JS frameworks out there that brings >>> many options to this field, but the problem will be >>> just that: only JS. >>> >>> For me the better option would be to create a new library to be used with >>> UI sets, that brings the power of some programatic JS >>> lib out there, and concentrate in the JS part in the short term but left >>> open to SWF for others that want to bring that part to it. >>> >>> I think many things nowadays can be done in CSS, or JS or combination of >>> both. And I like the idea of having most of this in CSS >>> if possible. I think Web Animations API has both options animations via >> JS >>> API and via CSS >>> >>> I was interested in Framer [1]. I always liked it. But seems Framer has >>> turn towards React. Today I could have a call with Framer people >>> to ask for possibilities to make some Royale lib (as we did for MDL) for >>> Framer , since although the older version is OS, the newer is still >>> not, although they want to make it OS. The problems is Framer is very >> React >>> oriented, so I think is not a real option. >>> >>> Then Framer people kindly point me to Popmotion Pure [2], that seems the >>> point from where Framer was created. >>> >>> I still need to dig a bit into this, but seems a good option (for what I >>> see). >>> So, one option could be: >>> >>> a) Use Web Animations API: I used this already in Jewel Wizard, and maybe >>> this is the real option of future >>> b) Use Popmotion >>> c) Use GreenShock [3] (I think others here like Harbs pointed to this. I >>> still didn't look at it, but I think is a payed lib, so maybe not the >>> better to use) >>> >>> What do you think about it? I'd like what others think about all of this >>> >>> >>> >>> [1] http://framer.com >>> [2] https://popmotion.io/pure/ >>> [3] https://greensock.com >>> -- >>> Carlos Rovira >>> http://about.me/carlosrovira >>> >> > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira
