On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 12:54 AM, Erik de Bruin wrote:
> From Alex in another thread:
>
> "1) whether I broke IOS and Android versions of SpinnerList/DateSpinner."
>
> The Mustella tests seem to indicate all is well. There may be issues
> that will only be visible in the wild, but we won't know u
>From Alex in another thread:
"1) whether I broke IOS and Android versions of SpinnerList/DateSpinner."
The Mustella tests seem to indicate all is well. There may be issues
that will only be visible in the wild, but we won't know unless we put
the release in the wild. As far as I'm concerned this
Hi,
> I thought that was what we agreed upon. Should we take out FontAwesome as
> well?
I can't see any reason why we need a user to accept the license if we including
it in binary form. We only need to prompt for the source in my understanding.
If people are really interested it's (now) well
I thought that was what we agreed upon. Should we take out FontAwesome as
well?
On 1/14/15, 12:36 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> Last night I tweaked the installer to take out the OSMF and SWFObject
>> options. Folks should make sure it works as expected.
>
>Can you expand on why you rem
Hi,
> Last night I tweaked the installer to take out the OSMF and SWFObject
> options. Folks should make sure it works as expected.
Can you expand on why you removed OSMF (MPL - category B) but not Font Awesome
(OFL - also category B) [1] And why is Font Awesome marked "Required"?
Thanks,
Just
On 1/13/15, 11:47 PM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>Alex,
>
>I see you've been working on the mobile Mustella failures. Just so we
>don't cross our beams, what else is on your plate with regard to the
>4.14 release?
If I have time I will look at the DateSpinner failures.
Last night I tweaked the in
> +1 for doing it required in the installer.
> Information on Wiki is not enough in my opinion.
I've started a new thread on this subject.
EdB
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>So, we can make this required, or we should somehow explain during the
>installation that that license is needed for FlatSpark.
Perhaps we could change the already existing hint:
From:
"The FlatSpark theme uses fonts licensed under the Open Font License. Do you
want to install the Font Awesome a
+1 for doing it required in the installer.
Information on Wiki is not enough in my opinion.
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/4-14-release-status-update-tp43705p44292.html
Sent from the A
Ok, I just confirmed this.
I installed 2 versions of 4.14, one without checking the "Adobe Embedded
Font Libraries and Utilites" license.
I get that exact error only when I use the version that I didn't accept
that license.
So, we can make this required, or we should somehow explain during the
i
I am installing the sdk again right now to confirm the issue.
> Ah! Is this information in the Wiki article? If not, it should be, so
> we can tell people to RTFM ;-)
We just need a confirmation and I'll add it to the wiki.
> If it is needed for FlatSpark why it is optional ? :)
I think we were debating this in another email.
If it is needed for FlatSpark why it is optional ? :)
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/4-14-release-status-update-tp43705p44287.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list arc
Ah! Is this information in the Wiki article? If not, it should be, so
we can tell people to RTFM ;-)
EdB
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Mahmoud Ali wrote:
> If I remember correctly we had this problem when we didn't check the fonts
> license during the install. It is optional, but it is nee
If I remember correctly we had this problem when we didn't check the fonts
license during the install. It is optional, but it is needed for FlatSpark.
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 5:20 AM, Erik de Bruin wrote:
> I saw it, looks like an isolated problem (single reporter). His
> problem seems related t
I saw it, looks like an isolated problem (single reporter). His
problem seems related to a missing or incorrectly linked FlatSpark
SWC.
We have some time, let's look into it.
EdB
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:09 AM, piotrz wrote:
> Erik,
>
> I'm really concerning about this jira
> https://issues.
Erik,
I'm really concerning about this jira
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-34700
Piotr
-
Apache Flex PMC
piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-development.247.n4.nabble.com/4-14-release-status-update-tp43705p44281.html
Sent from the
Alex,
I see you've been working on the mobile Mustella failures. Just so we
don't cross our beams, what else is on your plate with regard to the
4.14 release?
Thanks,
EdB
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 5:23 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala
wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2015 1:34 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> O
On Jan 10, 2015 1:34 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/8/15, 1:00 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
> >
> >The intention is to keep the graphics just the same, but move the display
> >logic to the new skin. Obviously something weren't wrong with the move,
> >just wrong enough to break the test
On 1/8/15, 1:00 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" wrote:
>
>The intention is to keep the graphics just the same, but move the display
>logic to the new skin. Obviously something weren't wrong with the move,
>just wrong enough to break the tests.
>
I remember you asking about skin sizing. I took a qui
: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: Re: [4.14] release status update
On Jan 7, 2015 7:56 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/7/15, 7:17 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>
> >
> > - a whole bunch of mobile tests fail
>
> I looked into this last night. I
On Jan 7, 2015 7:56 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/7/15, 7:17 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>
> >
> > - a whole bunch of mobile tests fail
>
> I looked into this last night. I think there may be several issues, but I
> think most failures are caused by a slight change to the graphics for the
> Separately, are we ready to remove the OSMF and SWFObject prompts from the
> install scripts?
If I understood correctly, Justin has picked that up... Justin?
EdB
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
On 1/7/15, 7:17 AM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>
> - a whole bunch of mobile tests fail
I looked into this last night. I think there may be several issues, but I
think most failures are caused by a slight change to the graphics for the
BusyIndicator used in the test. IOW, most ActionBar tests a
OK, we're getting closer:
- still hoping for an AIR 16 release
- Justin needs a bit more time for the final fixes for the 'legal' issues
- we have two sets of Mustella failures to worry about:
- FXG tests fail with FP/AIR 16
- a whole bunch of mobile tests fail
I'm sure the first two will res
Hi,
The release is progressing nicely.
I've just 'closed' the release branch for regular fixes. We're now in
full stabilization mode, trying to fix the failing Mustella tests, and
resolve the licensing issues. I've addressed the status and progress
of these issues in their respective threads.
Te
Fixed two more issues: FLEX-34693 and FLEX-34695
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Mahmoud Ali wrote:
>
> OK, you should be able to assign issues to yourself now.
>>
>
> Thank you Alex.
>
> I already resolved FLEX-34694 and FLEX-34692, both were reported by Olaf
> and were related to FlatSpark.
>
>
> OK, you should be able to assign issues to yourself now.
>
Thank you Alex.
I already resolved FLEX-34694 and FLEX-34692, both were reported by Olaf
and were related to FlatSpark.
OK, you should be able to assign issues to yourself now.
On 12/18/14, 2:05 AM, "Mahmoud Ali Neto" wrote:
>I have a JIRA account created (akamud), I can't assign issues to me. but
>I'm already resolving FLEX-34692 and FLEX-34682.
Thank you.
I've updated the RELEASE_NOTES and the 'want to fix' JIRA ticket.
EdB
On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Mihai Chira wrote:
> Both FLEX-26478 and FLEX-34609 are resolved, and now (after making
> sure they're in the 4.14 RC) I marked them as resolved in Jira.
>
> On 18 December 2014
Both FLEX-26478 and FLEX-34609 are resolved, and now (after making
sure they're in the 4.14 RC) I marked them as resolved in Jira.
On 18 December 2014 at 09:22, Erik de Bruin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've just cherry-picked the changes from the release branch into the
> develop branch. I've chosen to che
I have a JIRA account created (akamud), I can't assign issues to me. but
I'm already resolving FLEX-34692 and FLEX-34682.
Hi,
I've just cherry-picked the changes from the release branch into the
develop branch. I've chosen to cherry-pick rather than merge because
of the issues we had with a failed merge earlier this week, which made
the release branch a bit of a mess. I plan to do this more regularly
from now on, in
33 matches
Mail list logo
