Hi,
>> Regarding the release ... I would be willing to step up as Release Manager
>> for FlexUnit, BlazeDS, Mavenizer and as soon as it's ready FlexPMD.
I'd try one at a time :-)
>> My new Employer grants me one working day per week
Nice - more employers should allow that.
Thanks,
Justin
> Regarding the release ... I would be willing to step up as Release Manager
> for FlexUnit, BlazeDS, Mavenizer and as soon as it's ready FlexPMD. My new
> Employer grants me one working day per week for stuff like this and I would
> be glad to do so.
>
>
This is awesome news, Chris!
Thanks,
Om
Hi Alex,
well I wrote such a step-by-step tutorial .. it should be in our Wiki:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Apache+Flex+SDK+Mavenizer
But seems you have successfully mavenized Flex. The problem is that I haven't
released Flexmojos 7.1 yet so you need to add the sonatype sna
Hi,
> Keep in mind that we may not be able to do this for 3rd party component
> developers. Because we want to hotlink to their examples and code
> directly, we may not be able to 'build' a release from our side.
>
> I propose that we create a new thirdparty.xml and allow direct editing of
> the
Hi,
Don't really care if it's part of our project or not, but as it's an optional
part of installing the SDK it would be good to have it at Apache.
Justin
Oh I definitely think it's something to have
aYo
www.ayobinitie.com
mrbinitie.blogspot.com
On Aug 27, 2014 5:01 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
> Don't know anything about OSMF. Would we want it, or would it be a
> separate Apache project. Seems like it has its own community already?
>
> I'll try to f
On 8/26/14 7:56 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>
>This is also one other subtle issue I've just released. If we don't use
>the standard release process, then as per CTR -1 counts as a veto
>effectually blocking a release. Do we want to do there?
Well, it blocks that commit, just like a -1 blocks an
Don't know anything about OSMF. Would we want it, or would it be a
separate Apache project. Seems like it has its own community already?
I'll try to figure out who is in charge at Adobe.
-Alex
On 8/26/14 7:42 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I notice that recent bugs in Adobe bug base on O
HI,
> Unless I get some support from others, we'll be doing it the way you want.
OK, thanks.
This is also one other subtle issue I've just released. If we don't use the
standard release process, then as per CTR -1 counts as a veto effectually
blocking a release. Do we want to do there?
Thanks
Hi,
I notice that recent bugs in Adobe bug base on OSMF have been closed with
"NotEnoughTime" as the reason. Does any one know if Adobe has considered
donating the framework to Apache and f not could we make that happen?
Thanks,
Justin
Hi,
> I updated the structure to be more intuitive. Updated to Flexmojos
> 7.1.0-SNAPSHOT, Apache Flex 4.13.0, Apache FlexUnit 4.2, ...
Thanks - hopefully we can get it working.
> It was quite a lot of work and a big number of Tests will definitely fail,
I've fixed a few of those and will check
Hi,
> The rest of the PMC seems to agree with me that Justin has had ample time to
> make his
> case, and we are not convinced, and therefore it is time to end the
> discussion, agree to disagree, and move on.
Given people don't know the context or have access to that list I think it only
fair
Hi,
> I think it means it drops a few ranks, the fluctuation is expectable though.
A few months back it wasn't in the top 20 and hadn't been for some time.
Thanks,
Justin
I think it means it drops a few ranks, the fluctuation is expectable
though.
On Aug 25, 2014 11:04 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just noticed ActionScript has climbed a few more spots in the Tiobe index
> and is now at 17. [1] Was was actually 14 in June! Here's the graph [2]. I
> certain
On 8/26/14 4:34 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> Agreed, TDF might attract a new pool of developers. We are just
>> disagreeing on what the best way of attracting them is. I think trying
>>to
>> attracting them by asking them to do manual testing is not as attractive
>> as asking them to
Hi,
> Agreed, TDF might attract a new pool of developers. We are just
> disagreeing on what the best way of attracting them is. I think trying to
> attracting them by asking them to do manual testing is not as attractive
> as asking them to provide TDF fixes.
1. So manually testing is:
- compil
Hi,
> I know it seems clear to you, but other incubator folks disagree with you.
Two people suggesting you could possibly release it as snapshop is not exactly
the same thing as disagreeing with me.
> If the explorer.xml was not compiled in, flexicious's examples would be
> hooked up by now.
T
On 8/26/14 4:04 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>No, you can't announce / promote nightly build/snapshots [1].
>" Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
>non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots, release
>candidates, or any other similar package."
>
Hi,
> I think it would have been much more rewarding
> to the person offering the 3rd party links if we could have hooked him up
> yesterday.
I'm not sure that they are currently in a form that can be used in the
application and we would need to change the application to make it clear in the
a
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 8/26/14 3:31 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> >
> >>I don't believe my proposal is the "wrong way", just another alternative.
> >>
> >
> >I think your way would lead to confusio
Hi,
> I would say the line is when we compile a swf with the code in the repo, we
> need to make an official release.
+1 to that.
> If we are hot linking, i.e. we don't have the source for an example, we
> don't need to go through the release
> process. Same way as the Installer.
+1 Seems reas
Hi,
> I'm not sure extra process invites community building.
It already has, we've had people report issues during the RC process.
>> - PMC endorsement
> What are the benefits of that. Are you claiming more people will use it
> if endorsed?
I would say more people would use an official voted o
On 8/26/14 3:31 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>>I don't believe my proposal is the "wrong way", just another alternative.
>>
>
>I think your way would lead to confusion. Let's try to avoid that.
What kind of confusion?
>> In fact, we a
Alex,
Thanks for the info on email subjects. Will also keep that in mind (I too
replied to the original thread). Just wanted to drop a note here letting
ya know I caught this one too :)
Chris
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
> Hi Mihai,
>
> I didn't want our lack of respon
I was not sure how I'd give feedback on this, but I'd have to say Mihai hit
the nail on the head for how I felt too reading these emails.
After reading his email some thoughts came to mind which probably also
parrot a little of what Alex said.
This project is a labor of love. We all are here bec
Hi Guys,
ok so I just committed the refactored FlexPMD project (develop branch).
I updated the structure to be more intuitive. Updated to Flexmojos
7.1.0-SNAPSHOT, Apache Flex 4.13.0, Apache FlexUnit 4.2, ...
It was quite a lot of work and a big number of Tests will definitely fail,
cause the
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 8/26/14 2:54 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>
> >+1 to Justin's proposal. It makes sense to do things the right way and to
> >encourage new folks to become Release Managers as the overhead is very low
> >for TourDeFlex project.
> I d
As a side note, it will make your in-line responses more readable if you
leave an extra line of space between the quote and the response.
Thanks,
Om
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> Sorry in advance for the point-for-point rebuttal, but I couldn't resist...
>
> On 8/26/14 2
On 8/26/14 2:54 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>+1 to Justin's proposal. It makes sense to do things the right way and to
>encourage new folks to become Release Managers as the overhead is very low
>for TourDeFlex project.
I don't believe my proposal is the "wrong way", just another alternat
Sorry in advance for the point-for-point rebuttal, but I couldn't resist...
On 8/26/14 2:46 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>>I don't see any reason to add process where process is not required
>It's about community building.
I'm not sure extra process invites community building.
>
>> we can save tim
Hi,
> In my experience / opinion; It is quite common for corporate contracts with
> non-legally-enforcable clauses.
They certainly sometimes try - even here in Australia. Our employment laws
however makes it quite clear some types of these clauses are not actually
enforceable, in the case of n
Hi,
> My understanding is that when contractors work for a client, the client
> generally owns the code.
Depends on what part of the world you are in and the contract you have signed
with your employer or client. It's very different in the US to the rest or the
world.
With most of my contacts
+1 to Justin's proposal. It makes sense to do things the right way and to
encourage new folks to become Release Managers as the overhead is very low
for TourDeFlex project.
Only problem is the required wait time of 72 hours for an RC to be promoted
to production. Can we skip the 72 hours if we g
Hi,
> They said we could label the website version as a "development version" or
> "snapshot" (like Maven) does.
I'm really not sure we want to do that (see below).
> I don't see any reason to add process where process is not required
It's about community building.
> we can save time by not hav
HI,
> Just happened to notice that ColorPicker's button appears to have been
> changed in a way that wouldn't be backward-compatible.
Changing the min width and height by 3 pixels is hardly a huge compatibility
breaker. Plus it's one of the experimental spark components.
Justin
> My understanding is that a contractor "must" have the option of doing
> non-client work. If that's true, if you found an SDK bug while working for a
> client, would you "stop the clock", fix the bug, then "start the clock"
> again? That way the fix would be owned by you. If the fix is owned
On 8/26/2014 3:56 PM, Nick Collins wrote:
In many states ( California may be one of the exceptions ) those kinds
of clauses are completely unenforceable if the "invention" is
developed on your own time and only on your own equipment. If you are
using company resources, then it definitely murkie
In many states ( California may be one of the exceptions ) those kinds of
clauses are completely unenforceable if the "invention" is developed on
your own time and only on your own equipment. If you are using company
resources, then it definitely murkies the waters, but so long as you steer
clear o
I've tried calling him at the element river phone number, emailing him, and
contacting him on LinkedIn before, just to find out what his plans were for
SourceMate, and have yet to ever receive a response. That's why I thought
if someone on this list knew him personally they may get more traction.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Nick Collins wrote:
> Along those lines, I wonder if anybody here knows Chris Gross and might be
> able to convince him to donate SourceMate (since it hasn't been updated in
> a few years) so that we could integrate it into the Flash Builder plugin.
>
>
I believe
Along those lines, I wonder if anybody here knows Chris Gross and might be
able to convince him to donate SourceMate (since it hasn't been updated in
a few years) so that we could integrate it into the Flash Builder plugin.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Patel Amit
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is ther
Makes sense. Less is more!
EdB
On Tuesday, August 26, 2014, Mihai Chira wrote:
> Additionally, could we remove the prefix "Download the"? It feels
> self-evident, since all the menu items are under the "Download Flex"
> parent item.
>
> On 26 August 2014 17:53, Mihai Chira >
> wrote:
> > +1
>
On 8/26/2014 1:00 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
Thanks Jeffry,
One followup question: My understanding is that a contractor "must" have
the option of doing non-client work.
As lubricious as it sounds; a lot of contracts I am provided by
employers [bu default] they own everything I do regardless of wh
No objection from me. I usually let something like this sit for 24-48
hours to give a chance for folks in different time zones to respond, then
do it. So feel free to make the changes in a day or two.
-Alex
On 8/26/14 9:55 AM, "Mihai Chira" wrote:
>Additionally, could we remove the prefix "Do
Hi Mihai,
I didn't want our lack of response to imply to you that, as a new
committer, your thoughts are not welcome. They are, and I suspect most of
us do not have any disagreement with the basic principles of your message.
First, I want to share some information I've learned about Apache. Thi
Thanks Jeffry,
One followup question: My understanding is that a contractor "must" have
the option of doing non-client work. If that's true, if you found an SDK
bug while working for a client, would you "stop the clock", fix the bug,
then "start the clock" again? That way the fix would be owned
Does anyone have an idea of which Flex SDK was used for the examples?
Chris
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Chris Martin wrote:
> Thanks Michael, will do! :D
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Mihai Chira
> wrote:
>
>> +1
>> On 23 Aug 2014 04:54, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>>
>> > +1
>> >
>>
Hi Mihai,
If you have a "manager", that implies that you are an employee. The terms
and conditions of your employment, and the manager's authority level in
the company, factor into whether your contributions are sufficiently
permitted. You may need to go up your management chain and get them to
Additionally, could we remove the prefix "Download the"? It feels
self-evident, since all the menu items are under the "Download Flex"
parent item.
On 26 August 2014 17:53, Mihai Chira wrote:
> +1
>
> On 26 August 2014 17:51, Chris Martin wrote:
>> +1
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:53 PM, J
+1
On 26 August 2014 17:51, Chris Martin wrote:
> +1
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Justin Mclean
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> > +1. Didn't realize folks went after the binaries and source page that
>> > often.
>> Me either was quite surprised - probably means estimates of number of
>> inst
+1
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > +1. Didn't realize folks went after the binaries and source page that
> > often.
> Me either was quite surprised - probably means estimates of number of
> installs is a lot lower than the actually number. Perhaps people have
I got my manager to explicitly consent to automatic donations to
Apache when we need to fix things in the SDK. I'm not sure this (i.e.
an email) is enough from a legal standpoint.
On 26 August 2014 17:13, Alex Harui wrote:
> A question came up off-list that made me wonderŠ
>
> I've been an employ
I am not a lawyer, but that said..
On 8/26/2014 12:13 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
My understanding is that when contractors work for a client, the client
generally owns the code.
It depends on the contract, really. But, in my world it is very
uncommon for the client not to claim ownership of ever
A question came up off-list that made me wonderŠ
I've been an employee pretty much my whole career. Right now I work for
Adobe and everything line of code I write is owned by Adobe, even at home
after hours, even on my own computer, unless I cut a special deal.
Fortunately, I have their blanket p
I see it's in experimental, we don't care if the usage changes.
Tom
On 26/08/14 16:59, Alex Harui wrote:
> Just happened to notice that ColorPicker's button appears to have been
> changed in a way that wouldn't be backward-compatible. Do we care? After
> all, it is still experimental.
>
> On 8/
Just happened to notice that ColorPicker's button appears to have been
changed in a way that wouldn't be backward-compatible. Do we care? After
all, it is still experimental.
On 8/26/14 6:17 AM, "jmcl...@apache.org" wrote:
>Repository: flex-sdk
>Updated Branches:
> refs/heads/develop 827297fc
I was hoping you'd forward my reply so I don't have to write it again.
Here it is again:
So far, the two other folks on the incubator who replied to my question
there have not supported your position.
They said we could label the website version as a "development version" or
"snapshot" (like Mave
It worked.
It could have been your cache, but Infra also has been fighting a web
server problem where the server doesn't see new pages right away so it
could be that as well.
-Alex
On 8/26/14 12:32 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Justin Mclean
>wrote:
>
>>
Make sure your FlashBuilder set up is on a recent FlexJS install. The
Google Closure Library and Compiler versions changed and generate
different code.
On 8/26/14 7:35 AM, "Peter Ent" wrote:
>There seems to be two problems. The first is easily solvable: the
>build_example.xml has the HTML wrapp
There seems to be two problems. The first is easily solvable: the
build_example.xml has the HTML wrapper size restricted and it could be
changed to 100% x 100%.
The second problem seems more insidious. The SWF just seems blank and I
have to investigate that further. The JS output that is being cre
I pushed changes to BarChartExample that reflect the latest changes to the
SDK. I found one problem which I will look into today: the index.html file
that is generated during the ANT build differs from the index.html
generated by Flash Builder. This difference, which is the coded dimensions
of the
Oops. I made a bunch of changes to the chart package. I will update the
example soon.
Peter Ent
Adobe Systems
> On Aug 26, 2014, at 1:48 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala"
> wrote:
>
> I am getting this error:
>
> build_example.compile:
> [echo] Compiling BarChartExample.swf
> [echo] FLEX
You mean this : http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/flash-builder.html ?
Tom
On 25/08/14 15:11, Patel Amit wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could some share the link for the flash builder 4.7 plugin for the Java
> eclipse.?
>
> Amit
>
>
> __
> This
Hi,
Forwarding to dev@ at Om and Alex's request (with a couple of very minor
edits). Please feel free to comment.
Justin
> From: Justin Mclean
> Subject: Reason for the release process
> Date: 26 August 2014 12:07:29 pm AEST
> To: priv...@flex.apache.org
>
> Hi,
>
> This is come upon the dev
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Justin Mclean
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Published but didn't seem to work - anyone have any ideas?
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
I do see it here: http://flex.apache.org/download-tourdeflex.html
Maybe you need to clear your cache and try again?
Thanks,
Om
Hi,
Published but didn't seem to work - anyone have any ideas?
Thanks,
Justin
Unfortunately, Flash Builder 4.6 is not supported. You will need to use
Flash Builder 4.7, or FDT or possibly IntelliJ.
On 8/25/14 11:23 PM, "Patel Amit" wrote:
>we have any demo how to configure the FlexJs or FalconJs into the adobe
>flash builder 4.6 ?
>or any other steps ,blogs related to th
67 matches
Mail list logo
