[flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
Hi Mark, The standalone version of Flex Builder on Windows is based on 3.1.2 but the plugin version will work on 3.1.2 or 3.2 so you should be good to go. Let me know if you run into any issues. -Heidi Flex Builder Dev Manager --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Mark R. Jonkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi David While I'm not the original poster and realize (via the other posts on this thread) that the changes are documented, they aren't immediately available from where you would expect to find them on the website. For example: http://www.adobe.com/support/flex/ The top line says Current English Version: Flex 2.0.1... updaters available Click on the link and wind up at: http://www.adobe.com/support/flex/downloads_updaters.html You get the release notes for 2.0.1 if you click Release Notes under Flex Builder 2.0.1 but if you click the Flex 2.0.1 SDK Release Notes, you get the release notes from Flex 2.0 unless somehow the 2.0.1 stuff is interspersed (but that wasn't evident if it was). So if you clicked on the correct Flex Builder 2.0.1 link you got what you wanted but one would expect the SDK link to list out updates to the compilers as well (ie. what changes affect more then just the Flex Builder such as new components or functionality). One thing I wanted to know and still can't figure out without installing the Flex 2.0.1 updater is whether or not the underlying version of Eclipse has been updated from Eclipse 3.1.2 to 3.2.x. Might not be meaningful to others but I really need Flex to run well under Eclipse 3.2.x so that I can use Castillo only plugins with Flex. I'm currently running the 2.0 as a plugin so that I can use Eclipse 3.2 but then I keep getting exceptions and issues about can't retrieve labels, thread exceptions when running Flex Debugger Perspective under Eclipse 3.2 (if anyone out there knows a solution please let me know). Up until mid December, Subclipse plugin for the newer Subversion client was only available for Castillo (subclipse 1.0.4 for Eclipse 3.1 was released in December) so that caused other issues. I still don't know whether 2.0.1 upgrades Eclipse or not.. I'd love to know that. My guess is it won't. Second, if one is running Flex Data Services, the same page lists release notes for Flex Data Services 2.0.1 but I can't seem to find the link to download the Flex Data Services 2.0.1. Unless they are a). Contained within the Flex Builder 2.0.1 installer or b) are located somewhere else on the site. I think I found link last night from some other page to download said version of the data services but I can't seem to find it today and the link last night wound up with a broken link page. Not sure if Flex Charting has similar issues as I believe they install as part of Flex Builder 2 but if so I'd suggest a link on the update page along with the release notes. One should never have to search high and low and read between the lines to know what is included and what isn't and where one should search to find the rest of the parts one needs to update their install. So while the stuff information and associated files may very well be there on your site somewhere, the site lacks cohesiveness in presenting the updaters and information properly. While I didn't start the thread nor do I necessarily agree fully with the title of the thread, I do see a lack of cohesiveness to the information presented on the site. I'd also like to point out that the main Flex Product page doesn't indicate in any way that an update to Flex has been made available. Depending on my reason for visiting Adobe's site, I'd be inclined to visit either the product page or the support site, both should have links to the updaters and both should be clear that an update has occurred. Currently one only finds out about the update from the support site. Finally, more in response to those who are saying RTM, I'd say that the information needs to be posted clearly and in detail outside of the product documentation when it involves and updater like this. For example, if I'm in the middle of a major project that might benefit from said new feature but also could be completed without said new feature and the timeline of the project is rather tight. I would want to read enough detailed information and find it quickly without the need to install the update to determine if the risk of installing the update is less the the amount of effort to continue developing without the update (at least for said project). It might be just a link to a pdf that comprises the pages that were added to the full documentation: list of changes, and the docs on the new features. The sheer volume of the documentation for Flex can be overwhelming. On the subject of the documentation, having only worked with Flex for about a couple of months in my free time, I still have mixed feelings over
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
btw, all I own is my keyboard. Tim, I think most of us heard what you said. People are funny, remember this buddy. Sometimes just laying off the keyboard is the best and let the temper wind storms(i was going to say tantrums but, we are adults here) subside. Peace, Mike On 1/9/07, hbwvt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Mark, The standalone version of Flex Builder on Windows is based on 3.1.2 but the plugin version will work on 3.1.2 or 3.2 so you should be good to go. Let me know if you run into any issues. -Heidi Flex Builder Dev Manager --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Mark R. Jonkman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi David While I'm not the original poster and realize (via the other posts on this thread) that the changes are documented, they aren't immediately available from where you would expect to find them on the website. For example: http://www.adobe.com/support/flex/ The top line says Current English Version: Flex 2.0.1... updaters available Click on the link and wind up at: http://www.adobe.com/support/flex/downloads_updaters.html You get the release notes for 2.0.1 if you click Release Notes under Flex Builder 2.0.1 but if you click the Flex 2.0.1 SDK Release Notes, you get the release notes from Flex 2.0 unless somehow the 2.0.1 stuff is interspersed (but that wasn't evident if it was). So if you clicked on the correct Flex Builder 2.0.1 link you got what you wanted but one would expect the SDK link to list out updates to the compilers as well (ie. what changes affect more then just the Flex Builder such as new components or functionality). One thing I wanted to know and still can't figure out without installing the Flex 2.0.1 updater is whether or not the underlying version of Eclipse has been updated from Eclipse 3.1.2 to 3.2.x. Might not be meaningful to others but I really need Flex to run well under Eclipse 3.2.x so that I can use Castillo only plugins with Flex. I'm currently running the 2.0 as a plugin so that I can use Eclipse 3.2 but then I keep getting exceptions and issues about can't retrieve labels, thread exceptions when running Flex Debugger Perspective under Eclipse 3.2 (if anyone out there knows a solution please let me know). Up until mid December, Subclipse plugin for the newer Subversion client was only available for Castillo (subclipse 1.0.4 for Eclipse 3.1 was released in December) so that caused other issues. I still don't know whether 2.0.1 upgrades Eclipse or not.. I'd love to know that. My guess is it won't. Second, if one is running Flex Data Services, the same page lists release notes for Flex Data Services 2.0.1 but I can't seem to find the link to download the Flex Data Services 2.0.1. Unless they are a). Contained within the Flex Builder 2.0.1 installer or b) are located somewhere else on the site. I think I found link last night from some other page to download said version of the data services but I can't seem to find it today and the link last night wound up with a broken link page. Not sure if Flex Charting has similar issues as I believe they install as part of Flex Builder 2 but if so I'd suggest a link on the update page along with the release notes. One should never have to search high and low and read between the lines to know what is included and what isn't and where one should search to find the rest of the parts one needs to update their install. So while the stuff information and associated files may very well be there on your site somewhere, the site lacks cohesiveness in presenting the updaters and information properly. While I didn't start the thread nor do I necessarily agree fully with the title of the thread, I do see a lack of cohesiveness to the information presented on the site. I'd also like to point out that the main Flex Product page doesn't indicate in any way that an update to Flex has been made available. Depending on my reason for visiting Adobe's site, I'd be inclined to visit either the product page or the support site, both should have links to the updaters and both should be clear that an update has occurred. Currently one only finds out about the update from the support site. Finally, more in response to those who are saying RTM, I'd say that the information needs to be posted clearly and in detail outside of the product documentation when it involves and updater like this. For example, if I'm in the middle of a major project that might benefit from said new feature but also could be completed without said new feature and the timeline of the project is rather tight. I would want to read enough detailed information and find it quickly without the need to install the update to determine if the risk of installing the update is less the the amount of effort to continue developing without the update (at least for said project). It might be just a link to a pdf that comprises the pages that were added to the full documentation:
[flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
As a personal request, might I ask that this thread be closed. It's very easy to take pot-shots from the sidelines. But, from what I can tell, most on this list are serious people that appreciate the hard work and dedication that Adobe has provided. Granted, Flex isn't mature yet as a product. However, a lot of people here have gone through the beta cycles and come out just fine. After all, progress isn't free. It just takes a little effort. That being said, please let us not sink into the same type of discourse that has plagued similar lists. If you're not a fan of Adobe and Flex, than this probably isn't the right place for you. They have a customer service department for that. In the mean time, all of the positive minded subscribers to this list have much more useful things to do with their time than reading personal rants. Sorry for the bluntness, but if you cant say something nice. -TH --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, boy_trike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its great that there is an upgrade to 2.0.1 So where is the READ ME telling us about the changes. (oh yea, you can find a web page that tells you that there is something called modules and you can now change style sheets dynamically. but where are: 1). The examples 2). The new syntax changes 3). The list of the 250 bugs that are fixed (or are we supposed to guess which ones they got?) We should NOT have to find out about these features on someones blog. This seems very amateurish to me. Bruce
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
Agreed :) ( I got half-way down and went *noise..noise...noise...heh go Claus...noise..noise*) :) On 1/7/07, Tim Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a personal request, might I ask that this thread be closed. It's very easy to take pot-shots from the sidelines. But, from what I can tell, most on this list are serious people that appreciate the hard work and dedication that Adobe has provided. Granted, Flex isn't mature yet as a product. However, a lot of people here have gone through the beta cycles and come out just fine. After all, progress isn't free. It just takes a little effort. That being said, please let us not sink into the same type of discourse that has plagued similar lists. If you're not a fan of Adobe and Flex, than this probably isn't the right place for you. They have a customer service department for that. In the mean time, all of the positive minded subscribers to this list have much more useful things to do with their time than reading personal rants. Sorry for the bluntness, but if you cant say something nice. -TH --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, boy_trike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its great that there is an upgrade to 2.0.1 So where is the READ ME telling us about the changes. (oh yea, you can find a web page that tells you that there is something called modules and you can now change style sheets dynamically. but where are: 1). The examples 2). The new syntax changes 3). The list of the 250 bugs that are fixed (or are we supposed to guess which ones they got?) We should NOT have to find out about these features on someones blog. This seems very amateurish to me. Bruce -- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com
RE: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
Hi David While I'm not the original poster and realize (via the other posts on this thread) that the changes are documented, they aren't immediately available from where you would expect to find them on the website. For example: http://www.adobe.com/support/flex/ The top line says Current English Version: Flex 2.0.1... updaters available Click on the link and wind up at: http://www.adobe.com/support/flex/downloads_updaters.html You get the release notes for 2.0.1 if you click Release Notes under Flex Builder 2.0.1 but if you click the Flex 2.0.1 SDK Release Notes, you get the release notes from Flex 2.0 unless somehow the 2.0.1 stuff is interspersed (but that wasn't evident if it was). So if you clicked on the correct Flex Builder 2.0.1 link you got what you wanted but one would expect the SDK link to list out updates to the compilers as well (ie. what changes affect more then just the Flex Builder such as new components or functionality). One thing I wanted to know and still can't figure out without installing the Flex 2.0.1 updater is whether or not the underlying version of Eclipse has been updated from Eclipse 3.1.2 to 3.2.x. Might not be meaningful to others but I really need Flex to run well under Eclipse 3.2.x so that I can use Castillo only plugins with Flex. I'm currently running the 2.0 as a plugin so that I can use Eclipse 3.2 but then I keep getting exceptions and issues about can't retrieve labels, thread exceptions when running Flex Debugger Perspective under Eclipse 3.2 (if anyone out there knows a solution please let me know). Up until mid December, Subclipse plugin for the newer Subversion client was only available for Castillo (subclipse 1.0.4 for Eclipse 3.1 was released in December) so that caused other issues. I still don't know whether 2.0.1 upgrades Eclipse or not.. I'd love to know that. My guess is it won't. Second, if one is running Flex Data Services, the same page lists release notes for Flex Data Services 2.0.1 but I can't seem to find the link to download the Flex Data Services 2.0.1. Unless they are a). Contained within the Flex Builder 2.0.1 installer or b) are located somewhere else on the site. I think I found link last night from some other page to download said version of the data services but I can't seem to find it today and the link last night wound up with a broken link page. Not sure if Flex Charting has similar issues as I believe they install as part of Flex Builder 2 but if so I'd suggest a link on the update page along with the release notes. One should never have to search high and low and read between the lines to know what is included and what isn't and where one should search to find the rest of the parts one needs to update their install. So while the stuff information and associated files may very well be there on your site somewhere, the site lacks cohesiveness in presenting the updaters and information properly. While I didn't start the thread nor do I necessarily agree fully with the title of the thread, I do see a lack of cohesiveness to the information presented on the site. I'd also like to point out that the main Flex Product page doesn't indicate in any way that an update to Flex has been made available. Depending on my reason for visiting Adobe's site, I'd be inclined to visit either the product page or the support site, both should have links to the updaters and both should be clear that an update has occurred. Currently one only finds out about the update from the support site. Finally, more in response to those who are saying RTM, I'd say that the information needs to be posted clearly and in detail outside of the product documentation when it involves and updater like this. For example, if I'm in the middle of a major project that might benefit from said new feature but also could be completed without said new feature and the timeline of the project is rather tight. I would want to read enough detailed information and find it quickly without the need to install the update to determine if the risk of installing the update is less the the amount of effort to continue developing without the update (at least for said project). It might be just a link to a pdf that comprises the pages that were added to the full documentation: list of changes, and the docs on the new features. The sheer volume of the documentation for Flex can be overwhelming. On the subject of the documentation, having only worked with Flex for about a couple of months in my free time, I still have mixed feelings over its completeness in terms of at least examples and finding the right stuff quickly. I've often had to give up on the documentation and search the Internet for examples that meet my particular need. Interestingly enough at times a Google search pinpoints what I need in the LiveDocs that the straight search in the documentation failed to find. The other issue I find is that the examples often utilize the simpliest of cases. An example this
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
You don't have to read it Tim. It's Bruce's personal opinion just as your request is a personal request. It's real simple, you don't own this ofrum. And I'm not sure personal requests are given priority here. I happen to agree with Bruce; and I'm totally devoted to Adobe. But Macromedia has handled things better in the past and I hope things improve. We need Errata to know what's going on. It's my personal request that you don't flame me for my personal opinion. ;-/ Scott Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed :) ( I got half-way down and went *noise..noise...noise...heh go Claus...noise..noise*) :) On 1/7/07, Tim Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a personal request, might I ask that this thread be closed. It's very easy to take pot-shots from the sidelines. But, from what I can tell, most on this list are serious people that appreciate the hard work and dedication that Adobe has provided. Granted, Flex isn't mature yet as a product. However, a lot of people here have gone through the beta cycles and come out just fine. After all, progress isn't free. It just takes a little effort. That being said, please let us not sink into the same type of discourse that has plagued similar lists. If you're not a fan of Adobe and Flex, than this probably isn't the right place for you. They have a customer service department for that. In the mean time, all of the positive minded subscribers to this list have much more useful things to do with their time than reading personal rants. Sorry for the bluntness, but if you cant say something nice. -TH --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, boy_trike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its great that there is an upgrade to 2.0.1 So where is the READ ME telling us about the changes. (oh yea, you can find a web page that tells you that there is something called modules and you can now change style sheets dynamically. but where are: 1). The examples 2). The new syntax changes 3). The list of the 250 bugs that are fixed (or are we supposed to guess which ones they got?) We should NOT have to find out about these features on someones blog. This seems very amateurish to me. Bruce -- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
Fair enough Robert. Go ahead, make this flashcoders 2. Subject dropped. -TH btw, all I own is my keyboard. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Robert Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You don't have to read it Tim. It's Bruce's personal opinion just as your request is a personal request. It's real simple, you don't own this ofrum. And I'm not sure personal requests are given priority here. I happen to agree with Bruce; and I'm totally devoted to Adobe. But Macromedia has handled things better in the past and I hope things improve. We need Errata to know what's going on. It's my personal request that you don't flame me for my personal opinion. ;-/ Scott Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed :) ( I got half-way down and went *noise..noise...noise...heh go Claus...noise..noise*) :) On 1/7/07, Tim Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a personal request, might I ask that this thread be closed. It's very easy to take pot-shots from the sidelines. But, from what I can tell, most on this list are serious people that appreciate the hard work and dedication that Adobe has provided. Granted, Flex isn't mature yet as a product. However, a lot of people here have gone through the beta cycles and come out just fine. After all, progress isn't free. It just takes a little effort. That being said, please let us not sink into the same type of discourse that has plagued similar lists. If you're not a fan of Adobe and Flex, than this probably isn't the right place for you. They have a customer service department for that. In the mean time, all of the positive minded subscribers to this list have much more useful things to do with their time than reading personal rants. Sorry for the bluntness, but if you cant say something nice. -TH --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, boy_trike boy_trike@ wrote: Its great that there is an upgrade to 2.0.1 So where is the READ ME telling us about the changes. (oh yea, you can find a web page that tells you that there is something called modules and you can now change style sheets dynamically. but where are: 1). The examples 2). The new syntax changes 3). The list of the 250 bugs that are fixed (or are we supposed to guess which ones they got?) We should NOT have to find out about these features on someones blog. This seems very amateurish to me. Bruce -- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
FYI, my comment was based on errata not the Subject Line. I think everyone here likes Adobe or they wouldn't be using their software to base their solutions on it. To be clear, I was agreeing with the body of the message, not the subject line. No need for flame wars here. Everyone has a right to their opinion; that's how things get noticed. I think Adobe is working their butts off to make this transition, and I like it. I also am planning much of my future on FLEX2 so I hope bugs and errors are properly documented in each issue -- that's all. -r Tim Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fair enough Robert. Go ahead, make this flashcoders 2. Subject dropped. -TH btw, all I own is my keyboard. --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Robert Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You don't have to read it Tim. It's Bruce's personal opinion just as your request is a personal request. It's real simple, you don't own this ofrum. And I'm not sure personal requests are given priority here. I happen to agree with Bruce; and I'm totally devoted to Adobe. But Macromedia has handled things better in the past and I hope things improve. We need Errata to know what's going on. It's my personal request that you don't flame me for my personal opinion. ;-/ Scott Barnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Agreed :) ( I got half-way down and went *noise..noise...noise...heh go Claus...noise..noise*) :) On 1/7/07, Tim Hoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a personal request, might I ask that this thread be closed. It's very easy to take pot-shots from the sidelines. But, from what I can tell, most on this list are serious people that appreciate the hard work and dedication that Adobe has provided. Granted, Flex isn't mature yet as a product. However, a lot of people here have gone through the beta cycles and come out just fine. After all, progress isn't free. It just takes a little effort. That being said, please let us not sink into the same type of discourse that has plagued similar lists. If you're not a fan of Adobe and Flex, than this probably isn't the right place for you. They have a customer service department for that. In the mean time, all of the positive minded subscribers to this list have much more useful things to do with their time than reading personal rants. Sorry for the bluntness, but if you cant say something nice. -TH --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, boy_trike boy_trike@ wrote: Its great that there is an upgrade to 2.0.1 So where is the READ ME telling us about the changes. (oh yea, you can find a web page that tells you that there is something called modules and you can now change style sheets dynamically. but where are: 1). The examples 2). The new syntax changes 3). The list of the 250 bugs that are fixed (or are we supposed to guess which ones they got?) We should NOT have to find out about these features on someones blog. This seems very amateurish to me. Bruce -- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
And I stand PARTIALLY Corrected. Yes there is the bug list and the list of new features, but while the COMPILER options show the syntax and examples, the two big feature enhancements runtime stylesheet and modules both have a sentence without showing the syntax and / or examples. Where is one supposed to learn about them? Bruce --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, João Fernandes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fixed bugs? http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex2_fds.html#fixedbugs http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex201_sdk.html#fixedbugs what's new (like new properties and stuff like that)? http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex201_sdk.html#whatsnew http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex2_fds.html#whatsnew all at adobe website...and not at someones blog... João Fernandes On 06/01/07, boy_trike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its great that there is an upgrade to 2.0.1 So where is the READ ME telling us about the changes. (oh yea, you can find a web page that tells you that there is something called modules and you can now change style sheets dynamically. but where are: 1). The examples 2). The new syntax changes 3). The list of the 250 bugs that are fixed (or are we supposed to guess which ones they got?) We should NOT have to find out about these features on someones blog. This seems very amateurish to me. Bruce -- João Fernandes
RE: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
Hello, Have you tried the help system? The new functionality is documented. Regards David From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of boy_trike Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 8:24 AM To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Subject: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade And I stand PARTIALLY Corrected. Yes there is the bug list and the list of new features, but while the COMPILER options show the syntax and examples, the two big feature enhancements runtime stylesheet and modules both have a sentence without showing the syntax and / or examples. Where is one supposed to learn about them? Bruce --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com mailto:flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com , João Fernandes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fixed bugs? http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex2_fds.html#fixedbugs http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex201_sdk.html#fixedbugs what's new (like new properties and stuff like that)? http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex201_sdk.html#whatsnew http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex2_fds.html#whatsnew all at adobe website...and not at someones blog... João Fernandes On 06/01/07, boy_trike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its great that there is an upgrade to 2.0.1 So where is the READ ME telling us about the changes. (oh yea, you can find a web page that tells you that there is something called modules and you can now change style sheets dynamically. but where are: 1). The examples 2). The new syntax changes 3). The list of the 250 bugs that are fixed (or are we supposed to guess which ones they got?) We should NOT have to find out about these features on someones blog. This seems very amateurish to me. Bruce -- João Fernandes
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
Patience is a virtue, Bruce. I'm sure they'll get there. - Original Message - From: boy_trike [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 1:24 PM Subject: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade And I stand PARTIALLY Corrected. Yes there is the bug list and the list of new features, but while the COMPILER options show the syntax and examples, the two big feature enhancements runtime stylesheet and modules both have a sentence without showing the syntax and / or examples. Where is one supposed to learn about them? Bruce --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, João Fernandes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fixed bugs? http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex2_fds.html#fixedbugs http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex201_sdk.html#fixedbugs what's new (like new properties and stuff like that)? http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex201_sdk.html#whatsnew http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex2_fds.html#whatsnew all at adobe website...and not at someones blog... João Fernandes On 06/01/07, boy_trike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its great that there is an upgrade to 2.0.1 So where is the READ ME telling us about the changes. (oh yea, you can find a web page that tells you that there is something called modules and you can now change style sheets dynamically. but where are: 1). The examples 2). The new syntax changes 3). The list of the 250 bugs that are fixed (or are we supposed to guess which ones they got?) We should NOT have to find out about these features on someones blog. This seems very amateurish to me. Bruce -- João Fernandes -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
Bruce, As Dave Mendels points out, The new functionality is documented. Also as Dave and Ben have pointed out, when you install FB2.0.1 you will find the updated docs in the help system. You can also download PDFs of the updated doc from the Flex 2 Documentation page: http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/ Regarding Modules, I have already printed out the 13 pages of Chapter 31 from the updated Flex 2 Developer's Guide. The chapter is on Creating Modular Applications. For more good stuff on Modules, see Roger Gonzalez's blog for his slides and demos from MAX: http://blogs.adobe.com/rgonzalez/2006/11/my_max_preso.html For references on runtime stylesheets, how about you RTM and post back on this thread what you find (or still don't find). NOTE: One place you will not yet find the 2.0.1 docs is ... livedocs.macromedia.com! But hopefully LiveDocs will be getting the updated docs soon ;-) Bruce, in the future if you think something is not right, could you please first ask about it politely? You are a great voice on this forum, so please don't hold back. But fwiw, the initial subject line that you chose was heavy handed. When you are frustrated, before broadcasting harsh assumptions, please first test them a bit more thoughtfully. Please also remember that there are real people, who work real hard (even through the holidays), to bring you insanely great products and support. And that when one of the customers that they work so hard to make all this magic happen for doesn't initially get it, they can not but feel a little hurt when overly harsh accusations are made in public forums. Personally, I think that this moment genuinely is a moment of great triumph for the Flex team. I want to thank Adobe, and all of the amazing people at Adobe for creating and fine tuning these truly amazing tools that I know I am going to be building solutions with for decades to come. Regarding the 2.0.1 release, I say BRAVO!!! peace, g P.S. The Flex team really is spending a lot of time listening to customers. After you have had a week or so to get oriented on the 2.0.1release, please do write up a bullet point list of your suggestions of how the release could have been even more amazing, and then share it with this list or the members of the product team directly. If you do, I am sure that they will listen, take your thoughts into account, and will try use it to improve everyone's experiences in future releases. Lastly, if you think there are issues with Flex 2.0.1 documentation, just try using an open source project sometime. After using open source, I now justify all of my licensing costs for Adobe products on the value of their world class documentation alone ;-) On 1/6/07, boy_trike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And I stand PARTIALLY Corrected. Yes there is the bug list and the list of new features, but while the COMPILER options show the syntax and examples, the two big feature enhancements runtime stylesheet and modules both have a sentence without showing the syntax and / or examples. Where is one supposed to learn about them? Bruce --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, João Fernandes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fixed bugs? http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex2_fds.html#fixedbugs http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex201_sdk.html#fixedbugs what's new (like new properties and stuff like that)? http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex201_sdk.html#whatsnew http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/flex/2/ releasenotes_flex2_fds.html#whatsnew all at adobe website...and not at someones blog... João Fernandes On 06/01/07, boy_trike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its great that there is an upgrade to 2.0.1 So where is the READ ME telling us about the changes. (oh yea, you can find a web page that tells you that there is something called modules and you can now change style sheets dynamically. but where are: 1). The examples 2). The new syntax changes 3). The list of the 250 bugs that are fixed (or are we supposed to guess which ones they got?) We should NOT have to find out about these features on someones blog. This seems very amateurish to me. Bruce -- João Fernandes
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
Lastly, if you think there are issues with Flex 2.0.1 documentation, just try using an open source project sometime. After using open source, I now justify all of my licensing costs for Adobe products on the value of their world class documentation alone ;-) Uh-ooh.. Now you're being a bit harsh yourself, aren't you? ;) Open source projects all have poor documentation? While we're at it, where are the SWF9, RTMP and AMF3 specs? I agree with you that the Flex 2 documentation is very good though. Cheers, Claus. -- claus wahlers côdeazur brasil http://codeazur.com.br/ http://wahlers.com.br/claus/blog/
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
NOTE: One place you will not yet find the 2.0.1 docs is ... livedocs.macromedia.com! But hopefully LiveDocs will be getting the updated docs soon ;-) I guess it is ... but the link is not published ... tried changing 2 to 201 and it worked ... maybe it is not ready for release but anyways ... http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flex/201/langref/index.html
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
NOTE: One place you will not yet find the 2.0.1 docs is ... livedocs.macromedia.com! But hopefully LiveDocs will be getting the updated docs soon ;-) I guess it is ... but the link is not published ... tried changing 2 to 201 and it worked ... maybe it is not ready for release but anyways ... http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flex/201/langref/index.html
Re: [flexcoders] Re: and I thought Adobe was a professional company. Whats going on with the upgrade
Claus, My apologies if it appeared that I was casting aspersions on all open source projects. For the record, I am a huge fan of open source. That said, as a developer and a businessman, open source's value proposition generally does not include documentation and support at the level that commercial software does. (In fact, I am hard pressed to think of even one open source project that provides doc support that is on par or superior to Adobe's.) Regarding the specs for SWF9, RTMP and AMF3, I do not code directly to those APIs so I have never referenced those specs. (Again, my thanks to the great engineering teams at Adobe for giving me great rapid application development tools that enable me to code to higher level APIs ;-) I do see what you are saying. The Flash Player File Format Specification FAQ http://www.adobe.com/licensing/developer/fileformat/faq/ still says: The most recent version of the specification covers version 8 of the Flash file format (SWF) and then goes on to say: Adobe updates the Specification as soon as possible after each release. Ok. That was over six months ago now. But again, I write to the Flex 2/AS APIs. Personally, I do not require those lower level API docs at this time. What I would like is Netconnection Debugger updated for Flex 2/AS3/AMF3 :-) best regards, g On 1/6/07, Claus Wahlers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Lastly, if you think there are issues with Flex 2.0.1 documentation, just try using an open source project sometime. After using open source, I now justify all of my licensing costs for Adobe products on the value of their world class documentation alone ;-) Uh-ooh.. Now you're being a bit harsh yourself, aren't you? ;) Open source projects all have poor documentation? While we're at it, where are the SWF9, RTMP and AMF3 specs? I agree with you that the Flex 2 documentation is very good though. Cheers, Claus. -- claus wahlers côdeazur brasil http://codeazur.com.br/ http://wahlers.com.br/claus/blog/
