You’re likely to do most of the maintenance work, so it’s up to you… As far as users go there are some users writing client code in AIR and server code in node (in fact I’m involved in such a project right now). So I wouldn’t make sweeping assumptions.
________________________________ From: omup...@gmail.com <omup...@gmail.com> on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 10:21:37 AM To: dev@royale.apache.org Subject: Re: Publishing royale to npm On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > Why not publish both versions? > It looks like the js only is going to be just a zip file. That makes for easy maintenance. The swf version has a bunch of dependencies to be downloaded. Not a big deal, just thinking out loud if we really need to publish two different packages that might lead to confusion. I'm open to both, though. Thanks, Om > > > On Oct 30, 2017, at 10:15 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > I was wondering if we should publish the apache.royale-jsonly verson via > > npm instead of the full version with swf support. > > After all, users coming in vial npm would most likely not expect swf > > support. > > > > Any thoughts on this proposal? > > > > Thanks, > > Om > >
