OK, Installing FlexJS Nightly seems to be working again. -Alex
On 7/30/15, 1:51 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >Well, Peter found an issue with the install script so hold off before >having others try it. > >-Alex > >On 7/30/15, 6:25 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > >>I have wired a build from Tuesday into the Installer as the “FlexJS >>Nightly Build”. You have to right-click and select “Show Dev Builds” to >>see it in the list. I will update those builds on occasion but not >>always “nightly”. Please try it and see if all of the externs stuff got >>in there, and the latest FDB, and if it still works in IJ. >> >>Still no word from the MSDN folks so the CI server is still asleep. What >>form did others use to apply for Apache MSDN? Maybe I’m using the wrong >>form. >> >>-Alex >> >>On 7/29/15, 3:37 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com> >>wrote: >> >>>Alex, you know I was being sarcastic. :) I agree with showing things >>>that >>>work. BUT I am hearing stories of "pioneers" that want to try it right >>>now >>>and one, have know idea what it is or how to start, two, don't know >>>where >>>to start and three, ask people like me that is a developer and I have to >>>tell them I don't even know how to get a nightly right now. >>> >>>So... I guess it would be nice, just to get something in a stable >>>release >>>so we have STEP ONE, I know Carlos wants step 10 but we have to get to >>>step >>>one right now or else it's going to fail. >>> >>>Mike >>> >>>On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/29/15, 3:24 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com> >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>> >On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 6:02 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala >>>> ><bigosma...@gmail.com> >>>> >wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> +1 for a release of FlexJS. It would be great to highlight and >>>>talk >>>> >>about >>>> >> the new version of FlexJS at ApacheCon Europe on Oct 1st, 2015. >>>> >> >>>> >> I have been talking to various folks (outside of Apache) about >>>>FlexJS. >>>> >>One >>>> >> feedback I've received is that the version number of 0.02 makes >>>>folks >>>> >>think >>>> >> that it is not ready to be taken seriously. It is hard to convince >>>> >>folks >>>> >> to start using it if it has an 'alpha only' sheen to it. I really >>>>think >>>> >> that the next version should be at a 1.0 release. Even if it is >>>>not >>>> >> perfect, the FlexJS already has a lot of strong things going for >>>>it. >>>> I >>>> >> don't think we should keep it under the covers anymore, i.e. >>>>keeping >>>>it >>>> >>at >>>> >> a sub 1.0 release version. >>>> >> >>>> >> Thoughts? >>>> >> >>>> > >>>> >Or at least 0.5 or 1.0 alpha. :) I know there are 1000's of hours >>>>into >>>>the >>>> >compiler/transpiler/eternc side so having it at 0.0.2 really sucks. >>>> > >>>> >I know what Carlos is saying but the damn thing need to just have a >>>> >release, then release again, and again adding things. This isn't a >>>>fashion >>>> >show where you get one walk down the ile, it's iterative. Haha >>>> >>>> My philosophy is to set expectations low and exceed them. Once I hear >>>> that folks on this list are actually building things that work with >>>>FlexJS >>>> then I’d say we are ready to tell more folks about it by giving it a >>>>1.0 >>>> version. My goal after this release is to try to get something useful >>>> running. I’m sort of leaning toward this still being 0.0.3 and then >>>> trying to get that something running and call it 0.5 or 0.9 and then >>>>if >>>> someone else is successful that can be 1.0. >>>> >>>> I am going to spend a bit of time this week on some polish and trying >>>>to >>>> make the Windows side work better out of the box but yes, it should be >>>> more iterative than once a year going forward. >>>> >>>> -Alex >>>> >>>> >> >
