Hi guys,
How can i unsubscribe this list !? tks, Marcelo 2013/6/3 Maxime Cowez <maxime.co...@gmail.com> > @Sebastian: I could not disagree more. In my opinion Flex *is* an MVC > framework. It doesn't need an additional layer that requires me to write a > whole lot of boilerplate, unnecessarily complicates project structure and > forces me to adhere to some rules I often find questionable. I believe Flex > has all the tools for creating well-architectured, cleanly separated code > (at least since Flex 4). The one thing I miss is an IoC container (even > though I could get things done without it, but an IoC sure makes life > easier - as opposed to most MVC frameworks). For this I usually use > SwiftSuspenders because it is the only library that is *only* an IoC and > nothing else (except perhaps for Spring-AS, which I find too complex for > most situations). > Anyway, I'm not saying you shouldn't adopt frameworks like Swiz under the > Apache Flex umbrella (that's why I didn't vote: I don't like Swiz or any > other "MVC" framework, but other people should be able to use it if they > like). I'm saying that you really should not force people into such > frameworks. For me that would be a reason to drop Flex. > Max > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 6:22 PM, Sebastian Mohr <flex.masul...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > IMO ... Apache Flex needs an MVC framework out of the box ... may it be > > Parsley, Spring AS or Swiz. I'd call it then "Apache Flex MVC" framework. > > Having that would bring more stability to the our Flex market. More > > information can be found here [1]. > > > > [1] https://code.google.com/p/masuland/wiki/WhatsWrongWithFlex > > > > > > -- > > Sebastian (PPMC) > > Interaction Designer > > > > Looking for a Login Example with Apache Flex? Please check out this code: > > http://code.google.com/p/masuland/wiki/LoginExample > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > Thanks Carlos. > > > > > > When the 72 hours pass, please use a [VOTE][RESULT] tag to officially > > > close the vote. > > > > > > @Erik. My vote didn't have to really count since it came late, but > > without > > > a [VOTE][RESULT] tag on a vote summary email it wasn't clear it was > > > officially closed. > > > > > > Thanks again, > > > -Alex > > > > > > On 6/2/13 2:44 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > >I'm fine with a second reound of votes. So we can close here this > thread > > > >and I open a new one just now. > > > > > > > > > > > >2013/6/2 Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> > > > > > > > >> Ok, if that's what it takes to avoid further confusion, I'll second > > > >> (or third) a new vote, but all the points you raise have been > > > >> discussed and the resulting consensus conforms with the points you > > > >> want to add/amend in the new vote. > > > >> > > > >> Note also that Parsley also seems to be on the point of being > donated, > > > >> so all the 'endorsment' worries seem premature and unnecessary. > > > >> > > > >> A point of procedure: can you add a 'binding' vote AFTER the result > > > >> has been called? > > > >> > > > >> EdB > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> > wrote: > > > >> > My count is now three binding -1's. Igor Costa, Jeff Tapper, and > > Om. > > > >> I > > > >> > guess I'll add a fourth. Jeff qualified his vote, but it still > > reads > > > >>as > > > >> > -1 because it isn't right to assume he accepts your interpretation > > of > > > >>the > > > >> > proposal. Jeff should change his vote if he is convinced. > > > >> > > > > >> > The amount of discussion and confusion by others that we are not > > > >>picking > > > >> > Swiz as the favorite and that Parsley and other app frameworks are > > > >> > welcome, makes me make another plea to re-do this vote. Reading > > some > > > >>of > > > >> > these posts make it clear to me that folks have different ideas of > > > >>what > > > >> is > > > >> > going to happen in the future. I'm still unclear whether Swiz AOP > > > >>code > > > >> is > > > >> > going to be moved into the framework or not. I thought we were > > going > > > >>to > > > >> > warehouse Swiz, but instead, it appears that Carlos wants to make > a > > > >>set > > > >> of > > > >> > significant improvements to Swiz, which is fine, but might be what > > > >>makes > > > >> > people think we're endorsing or playing favorites. > > > >> > > > > >> > Yes, you have the numbers to forge ahead, but we are told to > > consider > > > >>the > > > >> > number of -1's. > > > >> > > > > >> > I would recommend a proposal that states clearly that > > > >> > > > > >> > 1) Swiz goes in its own repo. The original proposal says it could > > go > > > >> into > > > >> > a folder under utilities, but I think flexunit is a better model. > > > >> > 2) Swiz will have active development but release separately from > the > > > >>SDK. > > > >> > The activity level isn't quite clear from the original proposal. > > > >>People > > > >> > need to be comfortable that this activity isn't an endorsement or > > > >> > favoritism. > > > >> > 3) Acceptance of Swiz is not an endorsement or favoritism. > > > >> > 4) Any other app framework is welcomed to be donated via the same > > > >> process. > > > >> > > > > >> > It would make me much happier to have a vote thread with just +1's > > or > > > >> -1's > > > >> > without qualifications. > > > >> > > > > >> > -Alex > > > >> > > > > >> > On 6/1/13 10:19 AM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" <bigosma...@gmail.com> > > > >>wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> >>I am sorry, but I voted a -1 binding as well and my concerns have > > not > > > >> been > > > >> >>addressed. > > > >> >> > > > >> >>If we are going to go ahead, can we at least bring it into a > contrib > > > >> >>folder > > > >> >>and make at least one release out of it before promoting it to a > > main > > > >> >>repo? > > > >> >> > > > >> >>Thanks, > > > >> >>Om > > > >> >>On Jun 1, 2013 10:07 AM, "Carlos Rovira" > > > >><carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> > > > >> >>wrote: > > > >> >> > > > >> >>> Ok Erik, > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> I see it ok as well. As you said there's only one -1 binding > vote > > > >>(Igor > > > >> >>> Costa) and one -1 non binding vote (Carlos Velasco), and it was > > > >>already > > > >> >>> explained the motivations behind the donation and the intention > to > > > >> >>>maintain > > > >> >>> swiz out of main flex-sdk cycle and not promote it as the > > preferred > > > >> >>>mvc-ioc > > > >> >>> microarquitecture. > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> So for me it's ok, if it's ok for the rest of people here. > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> Hope Chris could send us that email soon regarding it's > intention > > of > > > >> >>>donate > > > >> >>> the source code and wiki > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> Thanks to you Erik as well for clearing things here. > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> Carlos > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> 2013/6/1 Erik de Bruin <e...@ixsoftware.nl> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > I think this is a valid vote and there is no need to declare > it > > > >> >>> > invalid. There is only one definite, binding -1 (Igor) and he > > > >> declined > > > >> >>> > to explain his motivation, something that is customary when > > > >>casting a > > > >> >>> > negative vote. > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > Once Chris Scott 'officially' donates Swiz - there are some > > hoops > > > >>he > > > >> >>> > has to jump through, but we'll get to those when he contacts > us- > > > >>we > > > >> >>> > can create a new repo for it: either a general > > > >>'flex-contrib/swiz' or > > > >> >>> > a specific one, like 'flex-swiz', we need to discuss that a > bit > > > >>more, > > > >> >>> > I think. > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > Thank you Carlos for managing the vote and keeping track of > this > > > >> >>> donation. > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > EdB > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> -- > > > >> >>> 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 > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > > > >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 > > > > > > > > >
