Hi Piotr, I don't know right now the internals of GSAP or other solutions, but my point is, no matter how good it's...is proprietary, so user can take it and use it in its projects, but we should not go that route, since Royale is Apache and OS.
Then we can see performance. GSAP could be the most performant, but I think there's enough standard web solutions right now that are very good and we can use in the right way with a compatible license. El mié., 1 jul. 2020 a las 16:15, Piotr Zarzycki (<[email protected]>) escribió: > Hi Carlos, > > It depends how good with implementation we can be vs. GSAP - I have no idea > how that library is build - Maybe it's using the same API as you are going > to use? > > Thanks, > Piotr > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020, 3:58 PM Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Harbs, > > > > Since GSAP is proprietary I prefer go another route, that could be not as > > performant as GSAP, but I think we can sacrifice a bit there ensuring we > > keep on ALv2. > > I think what we really need in most effects is easy to get those days > with > > Animate API. I think it is more interesting to get Animate API working on > > HTMLElement (that you already planned to do on royale extras) to avoid > > bracket access, and we can get many effects working that way with a good > > performance. > > > > Thanks > > > > > > El mié., 1 jul. 2020 a las 11:36, Harbs (<[email protected]>) > > escribió: > > > > > Yes. GSAP is a proprietary license. > > > > > > The cleanest way to add GSAP support would be with a library that’s > > > external to Royale. We could even do that on royale-extras which is not > > > strictly an Apache entity. > > > > > > While GSAP support would be great for those who want to use it, I was > > > actually suggesting to use the *lessons* from the GSAP page on getting > > > performance right. > > > > > > > On Jul 1, 2020, at 12:00 PM, Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Cool, > > > > > > > > I must say that actually we are not able to use animations in > > > > CSS. @keyframe is compiling with no errors, but compiler doesn't bake > > it > > > in > > > > the final App.css. > > > > So until that bug is solved I'm working just with Animation js API > > > > Anyway, I think we need to solve that bug and give people options, > > > although > > > > is clear that GSAP is better. > > > > > > > > What do you think about use GSAP as part of Royale Effects? will be > > some > > > > license issue? or we could use it? > > > > > > > > El mié., 1 jul. 2020 a las 9:53, Harbs (<[email protected]>) > > > escribió: > > > > > > > >> Most significantly, see how poorly css transitions actually perform. > > Web > > > >> Animations seem to do much better than css transitions. I don’t > think > > > >> anything beats GSAP though. > > > >> > > > >>> On Jul 1, 2020, at 10:47 AM, Harbs <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> > > > >>> When and if we work on improved Effects, there’s a GSAP performance > > > page > > > >> which is really useful for comparing different methods of animations > > and > > > >> how well they perform: > > > >>> https://greensock.com/js/speed.html > > > >>> > > > >>>> On Jul 1, 2020, at 10:35 AM, Carlos Rovira < > [email protected] > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > >>>> > > > >>>> I have in mind to do something about Effects in Jewel at some > point. > > > For > > > >>>> now we have the Effects library already pointed by Harbs. > > > >>>> For Jewel my plan is to continue with the philosophy of adding > > through > > > >> CSS > > > >>>> as other things done in Jewel. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> El mié., 1 jul. 2020 a las 8:26, Harbs (<[email protected]>) > > > >> escribió: > > > >>>> > > > >>>>> Take a look at the org.apache.royale.effects package in the > > “Effects” > > > >>>>> project. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> See manualtests/EffectsExample for some sample usage. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>>> On Jul 1, 2020, at 4:17 AM, Hugo Ferreira < > [email protected] > > > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> How to apply a simple standard effect (ex: Fade, Zoom, etc ...) > ? > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> -- > > > >>>> Carlos Rovira > > > >>>> http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Carlos Rovira > > > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
