-1 (binding)

----------------------------
Igor Costa
www.igorcosta.com
www.igorcosta.org


On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Margo Powell <margopow...@msn.com> wrote:

> +1
> I love using swiz as a complement to flex sdk!
>
> > Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 11:43:28 +0200
> > Subject: [VOTE] Swiz Framework Donation to Apache Flex
> > From: carlosrov...@apache.org
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> >
> > After proposal thread (http://markmail.org/message/jtedmmx5djqen52l
> ),comes
> > the vote thread.
> >
> > This thread is to decide if we finally adopt Swiz Framework under Apache
> > Flex, since there is multiple opinions in the Apache Flex community.
> >
> > points to take into account:
> >
> > * Swiz is a great addition to Apache Flex since it complements de SDK
> with
> > a microarquitecture for application MVC, IOC, DI very simple and well
> > designed.
> > * This will be a project like flexunit or utilities. So it's optional a
> NOT
> > part of the main sdk.
> > * Swiz is already in 1.4.0 stable version, under Apache License 2.0, has
> > its community and right now there's no maintenance or upgrade since
> people
> > behind the project is no longer working with Flex technology.
> > * Donation will be 1.4.0 source code and wiki content.
> > * Future plans: if donation is successful, Chris Scott (creator of Swiz)
> > will want to donate experimental 2.0.0 branch that brings AOP support, a
> > feature that could bring a great benefit to Apache Flex since it brings
> > something very new to client web technologies and that will require
> > evolution at compiler level (introducing compile time weaving).
> >
> > Points that some people argument to not accept the donation:
> > * There is other frameworks like Swiz out there in the same situation and
> > this donation could make Swiz the preferred/recommended IOC framework of
> > use.
> >
> > Points to take into account:
> > * Erik de bruin stated that maybe the problem is "what to do with it"
> under
> > Apache Flex umbrella.
> >
> >
> > Please make your vote.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Carlos Rovira
>
>

Reply via email to