On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:14 PM, J_A_X <[email protected]> wrote:

> FM4 was still in beta.  Most enterprise developers *do not touch*
> anything with a beta tag because it is extremely risky and can break
> the build.  Even recent projects I've been on (where I had no say
> about which version of FM we were using) was using 3.8 (I think?)
> because it did everything we wanted it to do.
>
> Trust me, those same people would want that same goal in FM4, but they
> haven't updated because it still had that beta moniker to it.  Even a
> release candidate is considered risky for any large enterprise RIA.
>

I should had released the pre-alpha as 4.0...  FM3 I don't even run the
tests for years now...  but whatever....  I shall probably adopt some ubuntu
like versioning.... 1108... year+month, not sure about that...

I don't understand why you would remove a functionality altogether
> unless there was a very good reason.  I can understand if you don't
> support it, but remove it?  At least leave it in the code for people
> to update it through github if need be.

Complete new codebase.  FM is all about new code.  But I don't really wanna
keep a piece of code that I don't know what it does and there is nobody
maintain it, it is just more stuff to people complain that do not work and
that bothers me.


> Isn't that the whole point of open source?
>
Sure, sure, there are tons of contributions on flexmojos....  not sure if 10
lines of code got changed on last 6 months...
Well, here it is flashbuilder goal to prove community commitment.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Flex Mojos" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/flex-mojos

http://flexmojos.sonatype.org/

Reply via email to