On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
> I am not in favor of having our customers unwittingly use untested > configurations. We should do some testing before switching everyone. > > How do you suggest we test? Thanks, Om > -Alex > ________________________________________ > From: omup...@gmail.com > [omup...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of OmPrakash Muppirala > [bigosma...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 9:08 PM > To: > dev@flex.apache.org > Subject: Re: Installer changes to go with 4.11? > > On Fri, > Oct 11, 2013 at 8:10 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>wrote: > > > > Hi, > > >> 1. Update config to point to OSMF 2.0 > > > It is. I assume you mean > so that it uses 2.0 only for 4.11? > > > > Sorry I meant to say or rather can > be - it's more if we want that also > > downloaded for 4.10 and 4.9? > > > > > I > would rather let it be downloaded for 4.10 and 4.9 as well. If we run > into > issues, we can always rollback the OSMF version to back where it was. > We > will never know if there are problems until people start using it. > > To sum > it up, I think we should just upgrade to OSMF 2.0 regardless of SDK > version > number. > > > 2. Update config to point to FP 11.9/AIR 3.9 final release > swcs > > We can do 2 that without recompiling no issues. > > > > I assume we would > want to default to 11.8/3.8 for a few weeks - in case > > these a bug with > 11.9/4.9? > > > > > I have updated the Mustella VM's FP 11.9 and AIR 3.9 to the > release version > a few hours ago. We need to give it a day or so to run all > the tests (sdk, > air and mobile) against the 11.9/3.9 runtimes. > > > > > > Thanks, > > Justin > > >
