Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Apache FlexJS 0.0.2 RC4

[Erik de Bruin]

Will votes carry over?

EdB




On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 8:57 AM, Alex Harui  wrote:

> This is the discuss thread.  Sorry for the churn.
>
> A missing JS file as added to this RC.  Everything else is the same.
> There is no new FalconJX RC at this time.
>
> -Alex
>
>


-- 
Ix Multimedia Software

Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht

T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl

[DISCUSS] Discuss Apache FlexJS 0.0.2 RC4

[Alex Harui]

This is the discuss thread.  Sorry for the churn.

A missing JS file as added to this RC.  Everything else is the same.
There is no new FalconJX RC at this time.

-Alex

[VOTE] Apache FlexJS 0.0.2 RC4

[Alex Harui]

Hi,

This is vote for the second (0.0.2) release of Apache FlexJS.

The release candidate can be found here;
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/flexjs/0.0.2/rc4/

Before voting please review the section,"What are the ASF requirements on
approving a release?", at:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release

At a minimum you would be expected to check that:
- MD5 and signed packages are correct
- README, RELEASE_NOTES, NOTICE and LICENSE files are all fine
- As this is the first release please carefully check the LICENSE and
NOTICE files
- That the build script completes successfully
- That you can compile and cross-compile a simple example using the SDK.

The source package is set up the same way as the repo.  This means that
the results of the build are not the same as an IDE-compatible SDK.  The
compiled source package can be used in combination with the FalconJX
source package to compile some of the sample applications.

The most convenient way to use the binary package is to install it via Ant
or the Installer.  To use an Installer you must use InstallApacheFlex
version 3.1 or later which is still in release candidate status at this
time.  You can get InstallApacheFlex 3.1 here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/installer/3.1/rc8/binaries/

Please vote to approve this release:
+1 Approve the release
-1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments to why)

This vote will be open for 72 hours or until a result can be called.

The vote passes if there is:
- At least 3 +1 votes from the PMC
- More positive votes than negative votes

Remember that this is an initial 'alpha-quality' release so I expect there
will be many bugs found.  IMO the goal is not to try to find and fix bugs
in the RC, but to make sure we have the packaging right, and enough
functionality that folks will have some success trying to use it.

People who are not in PMC are also encouraged to test out the release and
vote, although their votes will not be binding, they can influence how the
PMC votes.

When voting please indicate what OS, IDE, Flash Player version and AIR
version you tested FlexUnit with.

For your convenience, there is an ant script that automates the common
steps to validate a
release.  Instead of individually downloading the package and signature
files, unzipping, etc, you can instead:
1) create an empty folder,
2) download into that folder this file:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/falcon/0.0.2/rc4/ApproveFlexJS.
xml
3) run the script: ant -e -f ApproveFlexJS.xml -Drelease.version=0.0.2
-Drc=4

You are not required to use this script, and more testing of the packages
and build results are always encouraged.


You will have to install Google Closure Linter and JSHint prior to running
the script.

Please put all discussion about this release in the DISCUSSION thread not
this VOTE thread.

Thanks,
Alex

[CANCEL][VOTE] Apache FlexJS 0.0.2 RC3

[Alex Harui]

Sorry for the noise.  Missing JS file was discovered.

On 7/10/14 12:04 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:

>Hi,
>
>This is vote for the second (0.0.2) release of Apache FlexJS.
>
>The release candidate can be found here;
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/flexjs/0.0.2/rc3/
>
>Before voting please review the section,"What are the ASF requirements on
>approving a release?", at:
>http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release
>
>At a minimum you would be expected to check that:
>- MD5 and signed packages are correct
>- README, RELEASE_NOTES, NOTICE and LICENSE files are all fine
>- As this is the first release please carefully check the LICENSE and
>NOTICE files
>- That the build script completes successfully
>- That you can compile and cross-compile a simple example using the SDK.
>
>The source package is set up the same way as the repo.  This means that
>the results of the build are not the same as an IDE-compatible SDK.  The
>compiled source package can be used in combination with the FalconJX
>source package to compile some of the sample applications.
>
>The most convenient way to use the binary package is to install it via Ant
>or the Installer.  To use an Installer you must use InstallApacheFlex
>version 3.1 or later which is still in release candidate status at this
>time.  You can get InstallApacheFlex 3.1 here:
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/installer/3.1/rc4/binaries/
>
>Please vote to approve this release:
>+1 Approve the release
>-1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments to why)
>
>This vote will be open for 72 hours or until a result can be called.
>
>The vote passes if there is:
>- At least 3 +1 votes from the PMC
>- More positive votes than negative votes
>
>Remember that this is an initial 'alpha-quality' release so I expect there
>will be many bugs found.  IMO the goal is not to try to find and fix bugs
>in the RC, but to make sure we have the packaging right, and enough
>functionality that folks will have some success trying to use it.
>
>People who are not in PMC are also encouraged to test out the release and
>vote, although their votes will not be binding, they can influence how the
>PMC votes.
>
>When voting please indicate what OS, IDE, Flash Player version and AIR
>version you tested FlexUnit with.
>
>For your convenience, there is an ant script that automates the common
>steps to validate a
>release.  Instead of individually downloading the package and signature
>files, unzipping, etc, you can instead:
>1) create an empty folder,
>2) download into that folder this file:
>https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/falcon/0.0.2/rc3/ApproveFlexJS
>.
>xml
>3) run the script: ant -e -f ApproveFlexJS.xml -Drelease.version=0.0.2
>-Drc=3
>
>You are not required to use this script, and more testing of the packages
>and build results are always encouraged.
>
>
>You will have to install Google Closure Linter and JSHint prior to running
>the script.
>
>Please put all discussion about this release in the DISCUSSION thread not
>this VOTE thread.
>
>Thanks,
>Alex
>
>
>
>

Re: flacon: current state of development

[Alex Harui]

On 7/9/14 11:46 PM, "Glenn Willianms"  wrote:

>Can anyone point me to a 'very up to date' overview of where we are now
>and
>help get me back up to speed?
Here's a link to a draft of the June report.  There were a few minor edits
after before a final copy was sent to the board.
http://markmail.org/search/?q=+list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.flex-dev+draft+r
eport#query:list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.flex-dev%20draft%20report%20order%3
Adate-backward+page:4+mid:moyd6re4cx3wf6xa+state:results

>How are things going with falcon? Could someone give me a recap
There hasn't been much work on Falcon, more work is being done on FalconJX
and FlexJS, but if you look for threads with VJS in them you'll see a few
recent ones discussing possible Falcon work.

-Alex

Re: Looking for string translation for ES,GR and NL

[Erik de Bruin]

nl_NL: Installeer Apache Flex SDK {0} voor het gebruik in uw IDE

EdB




On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 2:15 AM, João Fernandes <
joaopedromartinsfernan...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, currently there is an invalid translation for the key INFO_WINDOW_TITLE
> for the installer
> The current english text is "Install Apache Flex SDK {0} for use with your
> IDE" and we need someone to translate to the 3 missing locales.
>
> Thanks
>
> --
>
> João Fernandes
>



-- 
Ix Multimedia Software

Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht

T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl

Looking for string translation for ES,GR and NL

[João Fernandes]

Hi, currently there is an invalid translation for the key INFO_WINDOW_TITLE
for the installer
The current english text is "Install Apache Flex SDK {0} for use with your
IDE" and we need someone to translate to the 3 missing locales.

Thanks

-- 

João Fernandes

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Jose Barragan]

Erik,

The content in the two branches are exactly the same, but the new branch is 
composed by clean commits only, without any merge-commit in their change set. 
In your current branch, we have a serie of merge-commit in order to maintain 
the branch updated. Each of those commits contain all changes from develop at 
point where was created, collapsing on just one commit all relative change-set 
from develop until that point. 

In your case, the current branch has been contaminated with a partial changes 
from develop and your commits are less readable and reusables using this way.

In other sort of things... when we use the git-merge as the only way, the 
complexity of commit tree, grows up exponentially.

I hope that is helpful

Best regards,
__
Jose Barragan
Senior Software Engineer
Codeoscopic
+34 912 94 80 80
http://www.codeoscopic.com

On 10 Jul 2014, at 19:09, Erik de Bruin  wrote:

> Jose,
> 
> What is the difference between the 'experimental/VF2JS' and 'VF2JS' remote
> branches?
> 
> EdB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Jose Barragan <
> jose.barra...@codeoscopic.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Erik,
>> 
>> Sorry about that, you're right.
>> 
>> But after read the atlassian's article, I supposed that I hasn't any good
>> reason to maintain the proposal alive, because seems as simply is one of
>> two main flavours of work with git, even I keep on thinking that is the
>> best, but maybe is just my point of view.
>> 
>> Anyway, just now I remade again the “experimental/VF2JS” branch and push
>> it.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> __
>> Jose Barragan
>> Senior Software Engineer
>> Codeoscopic
>> +34 912 94 80 80
>> http://www.codeoscopic.com
>> 
>> On 10 Jul 2014, at 17:32, Erik de Bruin  wrote:
>> 
>>> Jose,
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure why you just now deleted the new branch you created? Like
>> with
>>> your creation of it, that seems very sudden. I may still decide that your
>>> way is the way to go, but I need to understand first what I was doing
>>> wrong, and how your method is a better workflow.
>>> 
>>> Everyone else,
>>> 
>>> I'm just trying to understand how to work with git. @Fred: the wiki does
>>> not explain the use case where I'm working off a remotely published
>> feature
>>> branch, I checked before I started. Since the wiki couldn't tell me what
>> to
>>> do, I asked the question in this recent email thread: "New Flex to JS
>>> project." I think I correctly implemented the most easy to follow
>>> instructions.
>>> 
>>> So, first things first: what am I doing wrong in my workflow?
>>> 
>>> EdB
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ix Multimedia Software
> 
> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> 3521 VB Utrecht
> 
> T. 06-51952295
> I. www.ixsoftware.nl

Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Apache FlexJS 0.0.2 RC3

[Alex Harui]

Hmm.  You don't need to overlay anything if you aren't using an IDE.
That's why we can run all these ant scripts.

To use an IDE, you need to overlay Falcon in order for the IDE to use
Falcon instead of MXMLC.  I've never tried to get FB to use FalconJX
instead of MXMLC.  It would probably be a chunk of work, mirroring the
work I did in flex-oem-compiler.jar.  In FlexJS today, FalconJX isn't
overlaid because it is launched from a launch config and in that case, you
should only need to launch the right MXMLJSC.jar and if all the other jars
are in the right place, it should just work.  For other IDEs, I believe
they launch MXMLC directly so you have a better chance of figuring out how
to point to MXMLJSC instead.  Maybe try renaming.

Now if FalconJX is set up correctly and is asked to link current Flex SDK
swcs, there could be errors like the one you reported.  I've never
bothered to try it since I've only been focused on getting FalconJX to
compile with the FlexJSUI.SWC.  This error looks like an issue with the
codegen for an embedded asset.  The FlexJSUI.SWC doesn't have embedded
assets since I don't think there is embedding on the JS side.  So I think
this may be just one of the many cross-compiling issues VJS will need to
address that FlexJS simply avoids.  It might be that you are in fact set
up correctly.

-Alex

On 7/10/14 8:39 AM, "Erik de Bruin"  wrote:

>Alex,
>
>I tried to get FalconJX to work from this release. I couldn't. Best I
>could
>do, after running 'ant' on compiler.jx, was where I get the messages like
>this one: "CSS codegen problem. Reason: 'Unable to find compilation unit
>for Embed(source="Assets.swf",symbol="mx.skins.cursor.DragLink")." A
>search
>in the archive showed me one email from you to Justin explaining FalconJX
>needs to live in a 'proper' SDK, so I messed about with that. Couldn't get
>it to work...
>
>Can you please explain how to overlay FalconJX over a regular SDK, so I
>can
>use it to compile JS projects without using the installer and needing to
>continually copy newly build compilers?
>
>Thanks,
>
>EdB
>
>
>
>On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Alex Harui  wrote:
>
>> This is the discussion thread.
>>
>> The changes in this RC are in the installer downloading Google Closure
>> Library from GH via the sdk-installer-config.xml file, and a change to
>>all
>> view beads to allow the view to dictate the default height of the
>> component.  We used to just rely on the DisplayObject bounding box, but
>> that didn't work for TextFields with autosize=true and no text.
>>
>> Votes will carry over here, but it would be good for a few folks to try
>> build and run DataBindingTest or their own projects.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Ix Multimedia Software
>
>Jan Luykenstraat 27
>3521 VB Utrecht
>
>T. 06-51952295
>I. www.ixsoftware.nl

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Erik de Bruin]

Jose,

What is the difference between the 'experimental/VF2JS' and 'VF2JS' remote
branches?

EdB




On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Jose Barragan <
jose.barra...@codeoscopic.com> wrote:

> Hi Erik,
>
> Sorry about that, you're right.
>
> But after read the atlassian's article, I supposed that I hasn't any good
> reason to maintain the proposal alive, because seems as simply is one of
> two main flavours of work with git, even I keep on thinking that is the
> best, but maybe is just my point of view.
>
> Anyway, just now I remade again the “experimental/VF2JS” branch and push
> it.
>
> Thanks,
> __
> Jose Barragan
> Senior Software Engineer
> Codeoscopic
> +34 912 94 80 80
> http://www.codeoscopic.com
>
> On 10 Jul 2014, at 17:32, Erik de Bruin  wrote:
>
> > Jose,
> >
> > I'm not sure why you just now deleted the new branch you created? Like
> with
> > your creation of it, that seems very sudden. I may still decide that your
> > way is the way to go, but I need to understand first what I was doing
> > wrong, and how your method is a better workflow.
> >
> > Everyone else,
> >
> > I'm just trying to understand how to work with git. @Fred: the wiki does
> > not explain the use case where I'm working off a remotely published
> feature
> > branch, I checked before I started. Since the wiki couldn't tell me what
> to
> > do, I asked the question in this recent email thread: "New Flex to JS
> > project." I think I correctly implemented the most easy to follow
> > instructions.
> >
> > So, first things first: what am I doing wrong in my workflow?
> >
> > EdB
>



-- 
Ix Multimedia Software

Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht

T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

Rebase and merge both make sense depending on the situation.  No need to
have a hard and fast rule about it.

This conversation is moot if folks don't understand Git properly.  Let's
give it time, no point in forcing this new.

Thanks,
Om
On Jul 10, 2014 9:19 AM, "Jose Barragan" 
wrote:

> Hi Erik,
>
> Sorry about that, you're right.
>
> But after read the atlassian's article, I supposed that I hasn't any good
> reason to maintain the proposal alive, because seems as simply is one of
> two main flavours of work with git, even I keep on thinking that is the
> best, but maybe is just my point of view.
>
> Anyway, just now I remade again the “experimental/VF2JS” branch and push
> it.
>
> Thanks,
> __
> Jose Barragan
> Senior Software Engineer
> Codeoscopic
> +34 912 94 80 80
> http://www.codeoscopic.com
>
> On 10 Jul 2014, at 17:32, Erik de Bruin  wrote:
>
> > Jose,
> >
> > I'm not sure why you just now deleted the new branch you created? Like
> with
> > your creation of it, that seems very sudden. I may still decide that your
> > way is the way to go, but I need to understand first what I was doing
> > wrong, and how your method is a better workflow.
> >
> > Everyone else,
> >
> > I'm just trying to understand how to work with git. @Fred: the wiki does
> > not explain the use case where I'm working off a remotely published
> feature
> > branch, I checked before I started. Since the wiki couldn't tell me what
> to
> > do, I asked the question in this recent email thread: "New Flex to JS
> > project." I think I correctly implemented the most easy to follow
> > instructions.
> >
> > So, first things first: what am I doing wrong in my workflow?
> >
> > EdB
>

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Jose Barragan]

Hi Erik,

Sorry about that, you're right. 

But after read the atlassian's article, I supposed that I hasn't any good 
reason to maintain the proposal alive, because seems as simply is one of two 
main flavours of work with git, even I keep on thinking that is the best, but 
maybe is just my point of view.

Anyway, just now I remade again the “experimental/VF2JS” branch and push it.

Thanks,
__
Jose Barragan
Senior Software Engineer
Codeoscopic
+34 912 94 80 80
http://www.codeoscopic.com

On 10 Jul 2014, at 17:32, Erik de Bruin  wrote:

> Jose,
> 
> I'm not sure why you just now deleted the new branch you created? Like with
> your creation of it, that seems very sudden. I may still decide that your
> way is the way to go, but I need to understand first what I was doing
> wrong, and how your method is a better workflow.
> 
> Everyone else,
> 
> I'm just trying to understand how to work with git. @Fred: the wiki does
> not explain the use case where I'm working off a remotely published feature
> branch, I checked before I started. Since the wiki couldn't tell me what to
> do, I asked the question in this recent email thread: "New Flex to JS
> project." I think I correctly implemented the most easy to follow
> instructions.
> 
> So, first things first: what am I doing wrong in my workflow?
> 
> EdB

Re: [VOTE] Apache FlexJS 0.0.2 RC3

[Erik de Bruin]

+1

- sigs good
- builds fine
- /examples/DataBindingTest builds fine, and runs as expected (SWF and both
debug and release JS)

Nice work!

EdB



On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Alex Harui  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This is vote for the second (0.0.2) release of Apache FlexJS.
>
> The release candidate can be found here;
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/flexjs/0.0.2/rc3/
>
> Before voting please review the section,"What are the ASF requirements on
> approving a release?", at:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release
>
> At a minimum you would be expected to check that:
> - MD5 and signed packages are correct
> - README, RELEASE_NOTES, NOTICE and LICENSE files are all fine
> - As this is the first release please carefully check the LICENSE and
> NOTICE files
> - That the build script completes successfully
> - That you can compile and cross-compile a simple example using the SDK.
>
> The source package is set up the same way as the repo.  This means that
> the results of the build are not the same as an IDE-compatible SDK.  The
> compiled source package can be used in combination with the FalconJX
> source package to compile some of the sample applications.
>
> The most convenient way to use the binary package is to install it via Ant
> or the Installer.  To use an Installer you must use InstallApacheFlex
> version 3.1 or later which is still in release candidate status at this
> time.  You can get InstallApacheFlex 3.1 here:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/installer/3.1/rc4/binaries/
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
> +1 Approve the release
> -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments to why)
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours or until a result can be called.
>
> The vote passes if there is:
> - At least 3 +1 votes from the PMC
> - More positive votes than negative votes
>
> Remember that this is an initial 'alpha-quality' release so I expect there
> will be many bugs found.  IMO the goal is not to try to find and fix bugs
> in the RC, but to make sure we have the packaging right, and enough
> functionality that folks will have some success trying to use it.
>
> People who are not in PMC are also encouraged to test out the release and
> vote, although their votes will not be binding, they can influence how the
> PMC votes.
>
> When voting please indicate what OS, IDE, Flash Player version and AIR
> version you tested FlexUnit with.
>
> For your convenience, there is an ant script that automates the common
> steps to validate a
> release.  Instead of individually downloading the package and signature
> files, unzipping, etc, you can instead:
> 1) create an empty folder,
> 2) download into that folder this file:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/falcon/0.0.2/rc3/ApproveFlexJS.
> xml
> 3) run the script: ant -e -f ApproveFlexJS.xml -Drelease.version=0.0.2
> -Drc=3
>
> You are not required to use this script, and more testing of the packages
> and build results are always encouraged.
>
>
> You will have to install Google Closure Linter and JSHint prior to running
> the script.
>
> Please put all discussion about this release in the DISCUSSION thread not
> this VOTE thread.
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Ix Multimedia Software

Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht

T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl

RE: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Frédéric THOMAS]

Hi Erik,
I was only answering the 2 previous emails, nothing relative to what you or 
Jose did because I hadn't got a look at it but from what it wrote, he just 
updated your Branch from what has been done in develop, doing so, you can 
continue to work knowing that what others did on the develop branch doesn't  
break anything, a common process on long lived topic branches.
I haven't seen how Jose did it but if you need, it is explain here [1] under 
the section "Easy commit: (From a feature/bugfix branch 2/2)"

Frédéric THOMAS[1] 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Good+vs+Bad+Git+usage

> From: e...@ixsoftware.nl
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:32:31 +0200
> Subject: Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> 
> Jose,
> 
> I'm not sure why you just now deleted the new branch you created? Like with
> your creation of it, that seems very sudden. I may still decide that your
> way is the way to go, but I need to understand first what I was doing
> wrong, and how your method is a better workflow.
> 
> Everyone else,
> 
> I'm just trying to understand how to work with git. @Fred: the wiki does
> not explain the use case where I'm working off a remotely published feature
> branch, I checked before I started. Since the wiki couldn't tell me what to
> do, I asked the question in this recent email thread: "New Flex to JS
> project." I think I correctly implemented the most easy to follow
> instructions.
> 
> So, first things first: what am I doing wrong in my workflow?
> 
> EdB
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Carlos Rovira <
> carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> wrote:
> 
> > I'm with you @Jose and @Frederick. I remember that we was learning how to
> > use GIT when Frederik wrote that article. and I think its the way to go.
> > Many positive things, but as always it requires people to want to
> > understand "the git way". But if you try, you'll never go back.
> >
> >
> > 2014-07-10 16:53 GMT+02:00 Frédéric THOMAS :
> >
> > > "If you and your team are not familiar with, or don’t understand the
> > > intricacies of rebase, then you probably shouldn’t use it. In this
> > context,
> > > always merge is the safest option."
> > > That's what happen here despite my efforts to explain when and how to use
> > > "rebase" over "merge" (see the wiki) and my first main reason of being
> > > bored committing onto this repo over common stuffs.
> > >
> > > Frédéric THOMAS
> > >
> > > > Subject: Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch
> > > > From: jose.barra...@codeoscopic.com
> > > > Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:14:50 +0200
> > > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > >
> > > > Hi Justin,
> > > >
> > > > Under the new light from this article, I have anything else to say.
> > > >
> > > > Clearly I’m a rebase guy, over all, after suffering at our company the
> > > extremely complexity that we reached by using only the merge way.
> > > >
> > > > Well, as I told to @Erik, if my proposal didn't like it or didn't was
> > > candidate for adopt it, I'll delete it from repository asap.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your attention.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > __
> > > > Jose Barragan
> > > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > > Codeoscopic
> > > > +34 912 94 80 80
> > > > http://www.codeoscopic.com
> > > >
> > > > On 10 Jul 2014, at 15:37, Justin Mclean 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > >> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria
> > > based on best practices of git.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry but iMO it's not best practices, its just that a vocal group of
> > > git users think this it's the way to do things(tm) but other git users
> > > think otherwise. We also need to remember that have a central repo, need
> > to
> > > apply with the Apache way of doing things and that can sometimes be at
> > time
> > > odds with the git (or github) way of doing things. IMO Apache values
> > > traceability over a "clean" history.
> > > > >
> > > > > A good article about the pro and cons of merge and rebase can be
> > found
> > > here [1], it's interesting to note the Atlasssian approach.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Justin
> > > > >
> > > > > 1.
> > > http://blogs.atlassian.com/2013/10/git-team-workflows-merge-or-rebase/
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > Director de Tecnología
> > M: +34 607 22 60 05
> > F:  +34 912 94 80 80
> > http://www.codeoscopic.com
> > http://www.directwriter.es
> > http://www.avant2.es
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ix Multimedia Software
> 
> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> 3521 VB Utrecht
> 
> T. 06-51952295
> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
  

Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Apache FlexJS 0.0.2 RC3

[Erik de Bruin]

Alex,

I tried to get FalconJX to work from this release. I couldn't. Best I could
do, after running 'ant' on compiler.jx, was where I get the messages like
this one: "CSS codegen problem. Reason: 'Unable to find compilation unit
for Embed(source="Assets.swf",symbol="mx.skins.cursor.DragLink")." A search
in the archive showed me one email from you to Justin explaining FalconJX
needs to live in a 'proper' SDK, so I messed about with that. Couldn't get
it to work...

Can you please explain how to overlay FalconJX over a regular SDK, so I can
use it to compile JS projects without using the installer and needing to
continually copy newly build compilers?

Thanks,

EdB



On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Alex Harui  wrote:

> This is the discussion thread.
>
> The changes in this RC are in the installer downloading Google Closure
> Library from GH via the sdk-installer-config.xml file, and a change to all
> view beads to allow the view to dictate the default height of the
> component.  We used to just rely on the DisplayObject bounding box, but
> that didn't work for TextFields with autosize=true and no text.
>
> Votes will carry over here, but it would be good for a few folks to try
> build and run DataBindingTest or their own projects.
>
> -Alex
>
>


-- 
Ix Multimedia Software

Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht

T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Erik de Bruin]

Jose,

I'm not sure why you just now deleted the new branch you created? Like with
your creation of it, that seems very sudden. I may still decide that your
way is the way to go, but I need to understand first what I was doing
wrong, and how your method is a better workflow.

Everyone else,

I'm just trying to understand how to work with git. @Fred: the wiki does
not explain the use case where I'm working off a remotely published feature
branch, I checked before I started. Since the wiki couldn't tell me what to
do, I asked the question in this recent email thread: "New Flex to JS
project." I think I correctly implemented the most easy to follow
instructions.

So, first things first: what am I doing wrong in my workflow?

EdB



On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Carlos Rovira <
carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> wrote:

> I'm with you @Jose and @Frederick. I remember that we was learning how to
> use GIT when Frederik wrote that article. and I think its the way to go.
> Many positive things, but as always it requires people to want to
> understand "the git way". But if you try, you'll never go back.
>
>
> 2014-07-10 16:53 GMT+02:00 Frédéric THOMAS :
>
> > "If you and your team are not familiar with, or don’t understand the
> > intricacies of rebase, then you probably shouldn’t use it. In this
> context,
> > always merge is the safest option."
> > That's what happen here despite my efforts to explain when and how to use
> > "rebase" over "merge" (see the wiki) and my first main reason of being
> > bored committing onto this repo over common stuffs.
> >
> > Frédéric THOMAS
> >
> > > Subject: Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch
> > > From: jose.barra...@codeoscopic.com
> > > Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:14:50 +0200
> > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > >
> > > Hi Justin,
> > >
> > > Under the new light from this article, I have anything else to say.
> > >
> > > Clearly I’m a rebase guy, over all, after suffering at our company the
> > extremely complexity that we reached by using only the merge way.
> > >
> > > Well, as I told to @Erik, if my proposal didn't like it or didn't was
> > candidate for adopt it, I'll delete it from repository asap.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your attention.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > __
> > > Jose Barragan
> > > Senior Software Engineer
> > > Codeoscopic
> > > +34 912 94 80 80
> > > http://www.codeoscopic.com
> > >
> > > On 10 Jul 2014, at 15:37, Justin Mclean 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > >> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria
> > based on best practices of git.
> > > >
> > > > Sorry but iMO it's not best practices, its just that a vocal group of
> > git users think this it's the way to do things(tm) but other git users
> > think otherwise. We also need to remember that have a central repo, need
> to
> > apply with the Apache way of doing things and that can sometimes be at
> time
> > odds with the git (or github) way of doing things. IMO Apache values
> > traceability over a "clean" history.
> > > >
> > > > A good article about the pro and cons of merge and rebase can be
> found
> > here [1], it's interesting to note the Atlasssian approach.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Justin
> > > >
> > > > 1.
> > http://blogs.atlassian.com/2013/10/git-team-workflows-merge-or-rebase/
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> Director de Tecnología
> M: +34 607 22 60 05
> F:  +34 912 94 80 80
> http://www.codeoscopic.com
> http://www.directwriter.es
> http://www.avant2.es
>



-- 
Ix Multimedia Software

Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht

T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl

Re: [VOTE] Apache Flex FalconJX 0.0.2 RC3

[Erik de Bruin]

+1

- sigs good
- build completes successfully
- Falcon builds correctly functioning SWF from vf2js_DataBindingTest

Note:
- the 'ApproveFalcon' script failed, complaining my ASJS_HOME prop wasn't
set, when an 'echo $ASJS_HOME' proved it wrong.
- I cannot build a JS release, as FalconJX is not build by 'ant main', nor
does it function as a standalone compiler (see [DISCUSS])

EdB



On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 9:04 AM, Alex Harui  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This is vote for the second (0.0.2) release of the FalconJX (and Falcon)
> compilers.  I am not proposing a separate Falcon-only release package at
> this time.  The only purpose of the FalconJX packages are to serve as
> upstream packages for the FlexJS release.
>
> The release candidate can be found here;
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/falcon/0.0.2/rc3/
>
> Before voting please review the section,"What are the ASF requirements on
> approving a release?", at:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release
>
> At a minimum you would be expected to check that:
> - MD5 and signed packages are correct
> - README, RELEASE_NOTES, NOTICE and LICENSE files are all fine
> - As this is the first release please carefully check the LICENSE and
> NOTICE files
> - That the build script completes successfully
> - That you can compile using the results of building the source package
>
> The source package is set up the same way as the repo.  This means that
> the results of the build are not the same as the binary package.  The
> compiled source package can be used to build FlexJS apps via the command
> line and Ant, but not in Flash Builder or other IDEs.  I tested the source
> package by building it, then pointing to it from the source package of the
> FlexJS release candidate and building the examples in the FlexJS package.
>
> The binary package is set up as an upstream package for the FlexJS
> release.  The most convenient way to use the binary package is to install
> a FlexJS SDK via Ant or the Installer.
>
> Please vote to approve this release:
> +1 Approve the release
> -1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments to why)
>
> This vote will be open for 72 hours or until a result can be called.
>
> The vote passes if there is:
> - At least 3 +1 votes from the PMC
> - More positive votes than negative votes
>
> Remember that this is an initial 'alpha-quality' release so I expect there
> will be many bugs found.  IMO the goal is not to try to find and fix bugs
> in the RC, but to make sure we have the packaging right, and enough
> functionality that folks will have some success trying to use it.
>
> People who are not in PMC are also encouraged to test out the release and
> vote, although their votes will not be binding, they can influence how the
> PMC votes.
>
> When voting please indicate what OS, IDE, Flash Player version and AIR
> version you tested FlexUnit with.
>
> Please put all discussion about this release in the DISCUSSION thread not
> this VOTE thread.
>
> For your convenience there is an ant script that automates the common
> steps to validate a
> release.  Instead of individually downloading the package and signature
> files, unzipping, etc, you can instead:
> 1) create an empty folder,
> 2) download into that folder this file:
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/falcon/0.0.2/rc3/ApproveFalcon.
> xml
> 
> 3) run the script: ant -e -f ApproveFalcon.xml -Drelease.version=0.0.2
> -Drc=3
>
> You are not required to use this script, and more testing of the packages
> and build results are always encouraged.
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
>
>
>


-- 
Ix Multimedia Software

Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht

T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Carlos Rovira]

I'm with you @Jose and @Frederick. I remember that we was learning how to
use GIT when Frederik wrote that article. and I think its the way to go.
Many positive things, but as always it requires people to want to
understand "the git way". But if you try, you'll never go back.


2014-07-10 16:53 GMT+02:00 Frédéric THOMAS :

> "If you and your team are not familiar with, or don’t understand the
> intricacies of rebase, then you probably shouldn’t use it. In this context,
> always merge is the safest option."
> That's what happen here despite my efforts to explain when and how to use
> "rebase" over "merge" (see the wiki) and my first main reason of being
> bored committing onto this repo over common stuffs.
>
> Frédéric THOMAS
>
> > Subject: Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch
> > From: jose.barra...@codeoscopic.com
> > Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:14:50 +0200
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >
> > Hi Justin,
> >
> > Under the new light from this article, I have anything else to say.
> >
> > Clearly I’m a rebase guy, over all, after suffering at our company the
> extremely complexity that we reached by using only the merge way.
> >
> > Well, as I told to @Erik, if my proposal didn't like it or didn't was
> candidate for adopt it, I'll delete it from repository asap.
> >
> > Thanks for your attention.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > __
> > Jose Barragan
> > Senior Software Engineer
> > Codeoscopic
> > +34 912 94 80 80
> > http://www.codeoscopic.com
> >
> > On 10 Jul 2014, at 15:37, Justin Mclean 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria
> based on best practices of git.
> > >
> > > Sorry but iMO it's not best practices, its just that a vocal group of
> git users think this it's the way to do things(tm) but other git users
> think otherwise. We also need to remember that have a central repo, need to
> apply with the Apache way of doing things and that can sometimes be at time
> odds with the git (or github) way of doing things. IMO Apache values
> traceability over a "clean" history.
> > >
> > > A good article about the pro and cons of merge and rebase can be found
> here [1], it's interesting to note the Atlasssian approach.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Justin
> > >
> > > 1.
> http://blogs.atlassian.com/2013/10/git-team-workflows-merge-or-rebase/
> > >
> >
>
>



-- 
Carlos Rovira
Director de Tecnología
M: +34 607 22 60 05
F:  +34 912 94 80 80
http://www.codeoscopic.com
http://www.directwriter.es
http://www.avant2.es

RE: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Frédéric THOMAS]

"If you and your team are not familiar with, or don’t understand the 
intricacies of rebase, then you probably shouldn’t use it. In this context, 
always merge is the safest option."
That's what happen here despite my efforts to explain when and how to use 
"rebase" over "merge" (see the wiki) and my first main reason of being bored 
committing onto this repo over common stuffs.

Frédéric THOMAS

> Subject: Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch
> From: jose.barra...@codeoscopic.com
> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 16:14:50 +0200
> To: dev@flex.apache.org
> 
> Hi Justin,
> 
> Under the new light from this article, I have anything else to say. 
> 
> Clearly I’m a rebase guy, over all, after suffering at our company the 
> extremely complexity that we reached by using only the merge way.
> 
> Well, as I told to @Erik, if my proposal didn't like it or didn't was 
> candidate for adopt it, I'll delete it from repository asap.
> 
> Thanks for your attention.
> 
> Best regards,
> __
> Jose Barragan
> Senior Software Engineer
> Codeoscopic
> +34 912 94 80 80
> http://www.codeoscopic.com
> 
> On 10 Jul 2014, at 15:37, Justin Mclean  wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> >> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria based 
> >> on best practices of git.
> > 
> > Sorry but iMO it's not best practices, its just that a vocal group of git 
> > users think this it's the way to do things(tm) but other git users think 
> > otherwise. We also need to remember that have a central repo, need to apply 
> > with the Apache way of doing things and that can sometimes be at time odds 
> > with the git (or github) way of doing things. IMO Apache values 
> > traceability over a "clean" history.
> > 
> > A good article about the pro and cons of merge and rebase can be found here 
> > [1], it's interesting to note the Atlasssian approach.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Justin
> > 
> > 1. http://blogs.atlassian.com/2013/10/git-team-workflows-merge-or-rebase/
> > 
> 
  

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Jose Barragan]

Hi Justin,

Under the new light from this article, I have anything else to say. 

Clearly I’m a rebase guy, over all, after suffering at our company the 
extremely complexity that we reached by using only the merge way.

Well, as I told to @Erik, if my proposal didn't like it or didn't was candidate 
for adopt it, I'll delete it from repository asap.

Thanks for your attention.

Best regards,
__
Jose Barragan
Senior Software Engineer
Codeoscopic
+34 912 94 80 80
http://www.codeoscopic.com

On 10 Jul 2014, at 15:37, Justin Mclean  wrote:

> Hi,
> 
>> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria based 
>> on best practices of git.
> 
> Sorry but iMO it's not best practices, its just that a vocal group of git 
> users think this it's the way to do things(tm) but other git users think 
> otherwise. We also need to remember that have a central repo, need to apply 
> with the Apache way of doing things and that can sometimes be at time odds 
> with the git (or github) way of doing things. IMO Apache values traceability 
> over a "clean" history.
> 
> A good article about the pro and cons of merge and rebase can be found here 
> [1], it's interesting to note the Atlasssian approach.
> 
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 
> 1. http://blogs.atlassian.com/2013/10/git-team-workflows-merge-or-rebase/
> 

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria based on 
> best practices of git.

Sorry but iMO it's not best practices, its just that a vocal group of git users 
think this it's the way to do things(tm) but other git users think otherwise. 
We also need to remember that have a central repo, need to apply with the 
Apache way of doing things and that can sometimes be at time odds with the git 
(or github) way of doing things. IMO Apache values traceability over a "clean" 
history.

A good article about the pro and cons of merge and rebase can be found here 
[1], it's interesting to note the Atlasssian approach.

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://blogs.atlassian.com/2013/10/git-team-workflows-merge-or-rebase/

Re: Confluence credentials

[Mihai Chira]

Sorry, just created an account with mih...@apache.org. Instead of
credentials, I just need permission to edit. Thanks!

On 10 July 2014 12:09, Mihai Chira  wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> could someone set me up with confluence[1] credentials?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Mihai
>
>
> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/

Re: Apache Flex committer invite

[Mihai Chira]

Shall we update this wiki page[1] about our source code (and
potentially others)?

I'm happy to do it as part of making my first commit. If you have a
link to a discussion thread or other wiki page with more info about
the transition to git, please let me know.


[1] 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Getting+Started#GettingStarted-source

On 7 July 2014 00:39, Mark Kessler  wrote:
> I'll throw tortoisegit [1] in the pot as well for a nice GUI git that has a
> good integrated context menu set.
>
> [1] https://code.google.com/p/tortoisegit/
>
>
> -Mark

Confluence credentials

[Mihai Chira]

Hi,


could someone set me up with confluence[1] credentials?


Thanks,
Mihai


[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Carlos Rovira]

hehe  :-)


2014-07-10 11:50 GMT+02:00 Tom Chiverton :

> Took longer though :-)
>
> Tom
>
> On 10/07/14 10:42, Carlos Rovira wrote:
> > Yeah!, It was even easier when we used an abacus ;)
> >
> >
> > 2014-07-10 11:14 GMT+02:00 Tom Chiverton :
> >
> >> It was so much easier with SVN...
> >>
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> On 10/07/14 10:02, Jose Barragan wrote:
> >>> Hi Erik,
> >>>
> >>> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria
> >> based on best practices of git.
> >>> Currently, you and rest of apache flex team, maintains your branches
> >> updated using a commit merge node from latest commit on develop, isn’t
> it?.
> >> Well, this practice cause a big complexity on tree node and a messy
> >> traceability of branch content.
> >>> I was proposing you another way, using a combination of git-rebase and
> >> git-merge operations, in order to use git-rebase onto develop to
> maintain
> >> your branch updated, and git-merge to apply the complete final
> change-set
> >> on develop when developing is finished.
> >>> But, as I told you, it was a simple proposal only, and if you don't
> feel
> >> like to adopt it, just forget it and remove the proposed branch. I did
> the
> >> push to allow you can see the result of the proposed way vs your
> currently
> >> way at same time, on commits tree.
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> __
> >>> Jose Barragan
> >>> Senior Software Engineer
> >>> Codeoscopic
> >>> +34 912 94 80 80
> >>> http://www.codeoscopic.com
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 10 Jul 2014, at 07:29, Erik de Bruin  wrote:
> >>>
>  José,
> 
>  I'm confused. What was I doing wrong that made this necessary?
> 
>  EdB
> 
> 
> 
>  On Thursday, July 10, 2014, Jose Barragan 
> >> wrote:
> > Hi Erik,
> >
> > While I was preparing to reactivate the maven branch of falcon's
> >> project,
> > I have taken the opportunity to rebase your new branch "VF2JS", onto
> >> the
> > latest develop commit, with the intention that you get the new branch
> >> and
> > could continue your develop on it, using “git rebase” to maintain
> your
> > branch updated until the merge time. If you don’t feel happy with
> this
> > proposal, feel free to completely remove it, but if you feel
> >> confortable
> > with new branch and git practice, we can completely remove the old
> > "current" branch version VS2JS.
> >
> > I was only tried to help, with our git usage on apache flex
> >> repositories.
> > Thanks,
> > __
> > *Jose Barragan*
> > *Senior Software Engineer*
> > *josebarra...@apache.org
> > *
> >
>  --
>  Ix Multimedia Software
> 
>  Jan Luykenstraat 27
>  3521 VB Utrecht
> 
>  T. 06-51952295
>  I. www.ixsoftware.nl
> >>> __
> >>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud
> service.
> >>> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
> >>> __
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
Director de Tecnología
M: +34 607 22 60 05
F:  +34 912 94 80 80
http://www.codeoscopic.com
http://www.directwriter.es
http://www.avant2.es

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Tom Chiverton]

Took longer though :-)

Tom

On 10/07/14 10:42, Carlos Rovira wrote:
> Yeah!, It was even easier when we used an abacus ;)
>
>
> 2014-07-10 11:14 GMT+02:00 Tom Chiverton :
>
>> It was so much easier with SVN...
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> On 10/07/14 10:02, Jose Barragan wrote:
>>> Hi Erik,
>>>
>>> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria
>> based on best practices of git.
>>> Currently, you and rest of apache flex team, maintains your branches
>> updated using a commit merge node from latest commit on develop, isn’t it?.
>> Well, this practice cause a big complexity on tree node and a messy
>> traceability of branch content.
>>> I was proposing you another way, using a combination of git-rebase and
>> git-merge operations, in order to use git-rebase onto develop to maintain
>> your branch updated, and git-merge to apply the complete final change-set
>> on develop when developing is finished.
>>> But, as I told you, it was a simple proposal only, and if you don't feel
>> like to adopt it, just forget it and remove the proposed branch. I did the
>> push to allow you can see the result of the proposed way vs your currently
>> way at same time, on commits tree.
>>> Thanks,
>>> __
>>> Jose Barragan
>>> Senior Software Engineer
>>> Codeoscopic
>>> +34 912 94 80 80
>>> http://www.codeoscopic.com
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10 Jul 2014, at 07:29, Erik de Bruin  wrote:
>>>
 José,

 I'm confused. What was I doing wrong that made this necessary?

 EdB



 On Thursday, July 10, 2014, Jose Barragan 
>> wrote:
> Hi Erik,
>
> While I was preparing to reactivate the maven branch of falcon's
>> project,
> I have taken the opportunity to rebase your new branch "VF2JS", onto
>> the
> latest develop commit, with the intention that you get the new branch
>> and
> could continue your develop on it, using “git rebase” to maintain your
> branch updated until the merge time. If you don’t feel happy with this
> proposal, feel free to completely remove it, but if you feel
>> confortable
> with new branch and git practice, we can completely remove the old
> "current" branch version VS2JS.
>
> I was only tried to help, with our git usage on apache flex
>> repositories.
> Thanks,
> __
> *Jose Barragan*
> *Senior Software Engineer*
> *josebarra...@apache.org
> *
>
 --
 Ix Multimedia Software

 Jan Luykenstraat 27
 3521 VB Utrecht

 T. 06-51952295
 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>>> __
>>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
>>> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
>>> __
>>>
>>
>

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Jose Barragan]

Thanks Chris,

Regarding your recommendation Chris, follow this link to see it on UDemy:  
https://curiosity.com/courses/mccullough-and-berglund-on-mastering-git-udemy

__
Jose Barragan
Senior Software Engineer
Codeoscopic
+34 912 94 80 80
http://www.codeoscopic.com

On 10 Jul 2014, at 11:37, Christofer Dutz  wrote:

> Usually there is a tight correlation between such statements and the lack of 
> GIT knowledge.
> Sort of like the amount of the usage of the word "stupid" in scentances where 
> somebody is talking about Maven ;-)
> 
> And while noone will probably want to go back to Ant as soon as he has really 
> understood Maven, you will love GIT as soon as you got the hang of it :-)
> 
> I can certainly recommend the Video Tutorial "McCullough and Berglund on 
> Mastering Git" to get up to speed with all of the new GIT stuff.
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> Von: Tom Chiverton 
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. Juli 2014 11:14
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch
> 
> It was so much easier with SVN...
> 
> Tom
> 
> On 10/07/14 10:02, Jose Barragan wrote:
>> Hi Erik,
>> 
>> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria based 
>> on best practices of git.
>> 
>> Currently, you and rest of apache flex team, maintains your branches updated 
>> using a commit merge node from latest commit on develop, isn’t it?. Well, 
>> this practice cause a big complexity on tree node and a messy traceability 
>> of branch content.
>> 
>> I was proposing you another way, using a combination of git-rebase and 
>> git-merge operations, in order to use git-rebase onto develop to maintain 
>> your branch updated, and git-merge to apply the complete final change-set on 
>> develop when developing is finished.
>> 
>> But, as I told you, it was a simple proposal only, and if you don't feel 
>> like to adopt it, just forget it and remove the proposed branch. I did the 
>> push to allow you can see the result of the proposed way vs your currently 
>> way at same time, on commits tree.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> __
>> Jose Barragan
>> Senior Software Engineer
>> Codeoscopic
>> +34 912 94 80 80
>> http://www.codeoscopic.com
>> 
>> 
>> On 10 Jul 2014, at 07:29, Erik de Bruin  wrote:
>> 
>>> José,
>>> 
>>> I'm confused. What was I doing wrong that made this necessary?
>>> 
>>> EdB
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Thursday, July 10, 2014, Jose Barragan  wrote:
>>> 
 Hi Erik,
 
 While I was preparing to reactivate the maven branch of falcon's project,
 I have taken the opportunity to rebase your new branch "VF2JS", onto the
 latest develop commit, with the intention that you get the new branch and
 could continue your develop on it, using “git rebase” to maintain your
 branch updated until the merge time. If you don’t feel happy with this
 proposal, feel free to completely remove it, but if you feel confortable
 with new branch and git practice, we can completely remove the old
 "current" branch version VS2JS.
 
 I was only tried to help, with our git usage on apache flex repositories.
 
 Thanks,
 __
 *Jose Barragan*
 *Senior Software Engineer*
 *josebarra...@apache.org
 *
 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>> 
>>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>> 
>>> T. 06-51952295
>>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>> __
>> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
>> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
>> __
>> 
> 

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Carlos Rovira]

Yeah!, It was even easier when we used an abacus ;)


2014-07-10 11:14 GMT+02:00 Tom Chiverton :

> It was so much easier with SVN...
>
> Tom
>
> On 10/07/14 10:02, Jose Barragan wrote:
> > Hi Erik,
> >
> > Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria
> based on best practices of git.
> >
> > Currently, you and rest of apache flex team, maintains your branches
> updated using a commit merge node from latest commit on develop, isn’t it?.
> Well, this practice cause a big complexity on tree node and a messy
> traceability of branch content.
> >
> > I was proposing you another way, using a combination of git-rebase and
> git-merge operations, in order to use git-rebase onto develop to maintain
> your branch updated, and git-merge to apply the complete final change-set
> on develop when developing is finished.
> >
> > But, as I told you, it was a simple proposal only, and if you don't feel
> like to adopt it, just forget it and remove the proposed branch. I did the
> push to allow you can see the result of the proposed way vs your currently
> way at same time, on commits tree.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > __
> > Jose Barragan
> > Senior Software Engineer
> > Codeoscopic
> > +34 912 94 80 80
> > http://www.codeoscopic.com
> >
> >
> > On 10 Jul 2014, at 07:29, Erik de Bruin  wrote:
> >
> >> José,
> >>
> >> I'm confused. What was I doing wrong that made this necessary?
> >>
> >> EdB
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thursday, July 10, 2014, Jose Barragan 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Erik,
> >>>
> >>> While I was preparing to reactivate the maven branch of falcon's
> project,
> >>> I have taken the opportunity to rebase your new branch "VF2JS", onto
> the
> >>> latest develop commit, with the intention that you get the new branch
> and
> >>> could continue your develop on it, using “git rebase” to maintain your
> >>> branch updated until the merge time. If you don’t feel happy with this
> >>> proposal, feel free to completely remove it, but if you feel
> confortable
> >>> with new branch and git practice, we can completely remove the old
> >>> "current" branch version VS2JS.
> >>>
> >>> I was only tried to help, with our git usage on apache flex
> repositories.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> __
> >>> *Jose Barragan*
> >>> *Senior Software Engineer*
> >>> *josebarra...@apache.org
> >>> *
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ix Multimedia Software
> >>
> >> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> >> 3521 VB Utrecht
> >>
> >> T. 06-51952295
> >> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
> > __
> > This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> > For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
> > __
> >
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
Director de Tecnología
M: +34 607 22 60 05
F:  +34 912 94 80 80
http://www.codeoscopic.com
http://www.directwriter.es
http://www.avant2.es

AW: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Christofer Dutz]

Usually there is a tight correlation between such statements and the lack of 
GIT knowledge.
Sort of like the amount of the usage of the word "stupid" in scentances where 
somebody is talking about Maven ;-)

And while noone will probably want to go back to Ant as soon as he has really 
understood Maven, you will love GIT as soon as you got the hang of it :-)

I can certainly recommend the Video Tutorial "McCullough and Berglund on 
Mastering Git" to get up to speed with all of the new GIT stuff.

Chris


Von: Tom Chiverton 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. Juli 2014 11:14
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

It was so much easier with SVN...

Tom

On 10/07/14 10:02, Jose Barragan wrote:
> Hi Erik,
>
> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria based on 
> best practices of git.
>
> Currently, you and rest of apache flex team, maintains your branches updated 
> using a commit merge node from latest commit on develop, isn’t it?. Well, 
> this practice cause a big complexity on tree node and a messy traceability of 
> branch content.
>
> I was proposing you another way, using a combination of git-rebase and 
> git-merge operations, in order to use git-rebase onto develop to maintain 
> your branch updated, and git-merge to apply the complete final change-set on 
> develop when developing is finished.
>
> But, as I told you, it was a simple proposal only, and if you don't feel like 
> to adopt it, just forget it and remove the proposed branch. I did the push to 
> allow you can see the result of the proposed way vs your currently way at 
> same time, on commits tree.
>
> Thanks,
> __
> Jose Barragan
> Senior Software Engineer
> Codeoscopic
> +34 912 94 80 80
> http://www.codeoscopic.com
>
>
> On 10 Jul 2014, at 07:29, Erik de Bruin  wrote:
>
>> José,
>>
>> I'm confused. What was I doing wrong that made this necessary?
>>
>> EdB
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, July 10, 2014, Jose Barragan  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Erik,
>>>
>>> While I was preparing to reactivate the maven branch of falcon's project,
>>> I have taken the opportunity to rebase your new branch "VF2JS", onto the
>>> latest develop commit, with the intention that you get the new branch and
>>> could continue your develop on it, using “git rebase” to maintain your
>>> branch updated until the merge time. If you don’t feel happy with this
>>> proposal, feel free to completely remove it, but if you feel confortable
>>> with new branch and git practice, we can completely remove the old
>>> "current" branch version VS2JS.
>>>
>>> I was only tried to help, with our git usage on apache flex repositories.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> __
>>> *Jose Barragan*
>>> *Senior Software Engineer*
>>> *josebarra...@apache.org
>>> *
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>
>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>
>> T. 06-51952295
>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
> __
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
> __
>

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Tom Chiverton]

It was so much easier with SVN...

Tom

On 10/07/14 10:02, Jose Barragan wrote:
> Hi Erik,
>
> Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria based on 
> best practices of git.
>
> Currently, you and rest of apache flex team, maintains your branches updated 
> using a commit merge node from latest commit on develop, isn’t it?. Well, 
> this practice cause a big complexity on tree node and a messy traceability of 
> branch content.
>
> I was proposing you another way, using a combination of git-rebase and 
> git-merge operations, in order to use git-rebase onto develop to maintain 
> your branch updated, and git-merge to apply the complete final change-set on 
> develop when developing is finished.  
>
> But, as I told you, it was a simple proposal only, and if you don't feel like 
> to adopt it, just forget it and remove the proposed branch. I did the push to 
> allow you can see the result of the proposed way vs your currently way at 
> same time, on commits tree.
>
> Thanks,
> __
> Jose Barragan
> Senior Software Engineer
> Codeoscopic
> +34 912 94 80 80
> http://www.codeoscopic.com
>
>
> On 10 Jul 2014, at 07:29, Erik de Bruin  wrote:
>
>> José,
>>
>> I'm confused. What was I doing wrong that made this necessary?
>>
>> EdB
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thursday, July 10, 2014, Jose Barragan  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Erik,
>>>
>>> While I was preparing to reactivate the maven branch of falcon's project,
>>> I have taken the opportunity to rebase your new branch "VF2JS", onto the
>>> latest develop commit, with the intention that you get the new branch and
>>> could continue your develop on it, using “git rebase” to maintain your
>>> branch updated until the merge time. If you don’t feel happy with this
>>> proposal, feel free to completely remove it, but if you feel confortable
>>> with new branch and git practice, we can completely remove the old
>>> "current" branch version VS2JS.
>>>
>>> I was only tried to help, with our git usage on apache flex repositories.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> __
>>> *Jose Barragan*
>>> *Senior Software Engineer*
>>> *josebarra...@apache.org
>>> *
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>
>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>
>> T. 06-51952295
>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
> __
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
> __
>

Re: flacon: current state of development

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Glenn,

nice to see you back again here. You've traveled to the gates of hell to
see what's going on and have survived to return.

You are lucky hehe :)


2014-07-10 8:46 GMT+02:00 Glenn Willianms :

> HI all
>
>
>
> I'm back working with flex after 18 months having to write a couple of
> javaScript based apps and I must say its nice to be back.
>
>
>
> So here's the thing, I used to be following ever post here daily and was
> all
> over the forums etc but know I'm way behind of the current state of play
> with flex and falcon etc.
>
>
>
> Can anyone point me to a 'very up to date' overview of where we are now and
> help get me back up to speed?
>
>
>
> How are things going with falcon? Could someone give me a recap
>
>
>
> email me private if this isn't what's wanted in the list
>
>
>
> thanks folks and looking forward to getting stuck in.
>
>
>
> there's nothing like 18 months with javaScript to make some really
> appreciate AS3.
>
>
>
> Glenn
>
> tinylion development
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
Director de Tecnología
M: +34 607 22 60 05
F:  +34 912 94 80 80
http://www.codeoscopic.com
http://www.directwriter.es
http://www.avant2.es

Re: Hi, about my "experimental/VF2JS" branch

[Jose Barragan]

Hi Erik,

Nothing is really wrong there, is just for an philosophical criteria based on 
best practices of git.

Currently, you and rest of apache flex team, maintains your branches updated 
using a commit merge node from latest commit on develop, isn’t it?. Well, this 
practice cause a big complexity on tree node and a messy traceability of branch 
content.

I was proposing you another way, using a combination of git-rebase and 
git-merge operations, in order to use git-rebase onto develop to maintain your 
branch updated, and git-merge to apply the complete final change-set on develop 
when developing is finished.  

But, as I told you, it was a simple proposal only, and if you don't feel like 
to adopt it, just forget it and remove the proposed branch. I did the push to 
allow you can see the result of the proposed way vs your currently way at same 
time, on commits tree.

Thanks,
__
Jose Barragan
Senior Software Engineer
Codeoscopic
+34 912 94 80 80
http://www.codeoscopic.com


On 10 Jul 2014, at 07:29, Erik de Bruin  wrote:

> José,
> 
> I'm confused. What was I doing wrong that made this necessary?
> 
> EdB
> 
> 
> 
> On Thursday, July 10, 2014, Jose Barragan  wrote:
> 
>> Hi Erik,
>> 
>> While I was preparing to reactivate the maven branch of falcon's project,
>> I have taken the opportunity to rebase your new branch "VF2JS", onto the
>> latest develop commit, with the intention that you get the new branch and
>> could continue your develop on it, using “git rebase” to maintain your
>> branch updated until the merge time. If you don’t feel happy with this
>> proposal, feel free to completely remove it, but if you feel confortable
>> with new branch and git practice, we can completely remove the old
>> "current" branch version VS2JS.
>> 
>> I was only tried to help, with our git usage on apache flex repositories.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> __
>> *Jose Barragan*
>> *Senior Software Engineer*
>> *josebarra...@apache.org
>> *
>> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ix Multimedia Software
> 
> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> 3521 VB Utrecht
> 
> T. 06-51952295
> I. www.ixsoftware.nl

[DISCUSS] Discuss Apache FlexJS 0.0.2 RC3

[Alex Harui]

This is the discussion thread.

The changes in this RC are in the installer downloading Google Closure
Library from GH via the sdk-installer-config.xml file, and a change to all
view beads to allow the view to dictate the default height of the
component.  We used to just rely on the DisplayObject bounding box, but
that didn't work for TextFields with autosize=true and no text.

Votes will carry over here, but it would be good for a few folks to try
build and run DataBindingTest or their own projects.

-Alex

[VOTE] Apache FlexJS 0.0.2 RC3

[Alex Harui]

Hi,

This is vote for the second (0.0.2) release of Apache FlexJS.

The release candidate can be found here;
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/flexjs/0.0.2/rc3/

Before voting please review the section,"What are the ASF requirements on
approving a release?", at:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release

At a minimum you would be expected to check that:
- MD5 and signed packages are correct
- README, RELEASE_NOTES, NOTICE and LICENSE files are all fine
- As this is the first release please carefully check the LICENSE and
NOTICE files
- That the build script completes successfully
- That you can compile and cross-compile a simple example using the SDK.

The source package is set up the same way as the repo.  This means that
the results of the build are not the same as an IDE-compatible SDK.  The
compiled source package can be used in combination with the FalconJX
source package to compile some of the sample applications.

The most convenient way to use the binary package is to install it via Ant
or the Installer.  To use an Installer you must use InstallApacheFlex
version 3.1 or later which is still in release candidate status at this
time.  You can get InstallApacheFlex 3.1 here:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/installer/3.1/rc4/binaries/

Please vote to approve this release:
+1 Approve the release
-1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments to why)

This vote will be open for 72 hours or until a result can be called.

The vote passes if there is:
- At least 3 +1 votes from the PMC
- More positive votes than negative votes

Remember that this is an initial 'alpha-quality' release so I expect there
will be many bugs found.  IMO the goal is not to try to find and fix bugs
in the RC, but to make sure we have the packaging right, and enough
functionality that folks will have some success trying to use it.

People who are not in PMC are also encouraged to test out the release and
vote, although their votes will not be binding, they can influence how the
PMC votes.

When voting please indicate what OS, IDE, Flash Player version and AIR
version you tested FlexUnit with.

For your convenience, there is an ant script that automates the common
steps to validate a
release.  Instead of individually downloading the package and signature
files, unzipping, etc, you can instead:
1) create an empty folder,
2) download into that folder this file:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/falcon/0.0.2/rc3/ApproveFlexJS.
xml
3) run the script: ant -e -f ApproveFlexJS.xml -Drelease.version=0.0.2
-Drc=3

You are not required to use this script, and more testing of the packages
and build results are always encouraged.


You will have to install Google Closure Linter and JSHint prior to running
the script.

Please put all discussion about this release in the DISCUSSION thread not
this VOTE thread.

Thanks,
Alex

[VOTE] Apache Flex FalconJX 0.0.2 RC3

[Alex Harui]

Hi,

This is vote for the second (0.0.2) release of the FalconJX (and Falcon)
compilers.  I am not proposing a separate Falcon-only release package at
this time.  The only purpose of the FalconJX packages are to serve as
upstream packages for the FlexJS release.

The release candidate can be found here;
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/falcon/0.0.2/rc3/

Before voting please review the section,"What are the ASF requirements on
approving a release?", at:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release

At a minimum you would be expected to check that:
- MD5 and signed packages are correct
- README, RELEASE_NOTES, NOTICE and LICENSE files are all fine
- As this is the first release please carefully check the LICENSE and
NOTICE files
- That the build script completes successfully
- That you can compile using the results of building the source package

The source package is set up the same way as the repo.  This means that
the results of the build are not the same as the binary package.  The
compiled source package can be used to build FlexJS apps via the command
line and Ant, but not in Flash Builder or other IDEs.  I tested the source
package by building it, then pointing to it from the source package of the
FlexJS release candidate and building the examples in the FlexJS package.

The binary package is set up as an upstream package for the FlexJS
release.  The most convenient way to use the binary package is to install
a FlexJS SDK via Ant or the Installer.

Please vote to approve this release:
+1 Approve the release
-1 Veto the release (please provide specific comments to why)

This vote will be open for 72 hours or until a result can be called.

The vote passes if there is:
- At least 3 +1 votes from the PMC
- More positive votes than negative votes

Remember that this is an initial 'alpha-quality' release so I expect there
will be many bugs found.  IMO the goal is not to try to find and fix bugs
in the RC, but to make sure we have the packaging right, and enough
functionality that folks will have some success trying to use it.

People who are not in PMC are also encouraged to test out the release and
vote, although their votes will not be binding, they can influence how the
PMC votes.

When voting please indicate what OS, IDE, Flash Player version and AIR
version you tested FlexUnit with.

Please put all discussion about this release in the DISCUSSION thread not
this VOTE thread.

For your convenience there is an ant script that automates the common
steps to validate a
release.  Instead of individually downloading the package and signature
files, unzipping, etc, you can instead:
1) create an empty folder,
2) download into that folder this file:
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/flex/falcon/0.0.2/rc3/ApproveFalcon.
xml
3) run the script: ant -e -f ApproveFalcon.xml -Drelease.version=0.0.2
-Drc=3

You are not required to use this script, and more testing of the packages
and build results are always encouraged.

Thanks,
Alex

[DISCUSS] Discuss Apache Flex FalconJX 0.0.2 RC3

[Alex Harui]

This is the discussion thread.

The changes to this RC are related to using the latest Google Closure
Compiler and Google Closure Library.

Votes will carry over.

-Alex