2018-01-03 21:22 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: > > Great, so please help us create those parts by telling more about the > fonts and colors you are using. >
Hi Alex, inside the WP admin interface, in theme options you have a font section where all of you can see what fonts are used for each part (Appearance > Theme Options > Typography Options ) The two fonts used most of the time are: Hind Siliguri (normal texts) and Signika (titles, headings, menu,...) > In order for us to make the other parts look consistent we need to know > the fonts being used. The ruler-and-pencil icon appears to be using font > family "et-line". Can you tell me where I can get a free and open source > et-line font? > http://rhythm.nikadevs.com/content/icons-et-line > > IMO, we will get to the first release faster and better with a better site > that attracts more developers instead of users. > IMHO, I think that should not happen, since there's so much involved but I could be wrong at all, and is only my point of view. I think people expect something that looks promising and from there they get passion and involvement. But it's difficult to get to that point right now for non-flex-old-developers. Hope I'm wrong with this.. > I am not an official spokesperson for Adobe or its business strategies, > but from my perspective, Adobe is not very interested in traditional web > applications so a good looking simple example probably isn't going to > convince them to keep paying me and Peter. Adobe is way more interested > in creatives, and in helping these folks create web content and mobile > applications. Otherwise, I would think Adobe would be pushing some sort > of migration solution for its Flex customers. Also, Adobe has to produce > a ton of web content itself to market and support its customers. > So...we can conclude that Adobe will be happy to pay you both if we get to something that delivers good looking graphics...and that's why I'm asking you both to team to make UI components more good looking. > > That is one reason I put some time into mocking up the Royale website in > Royale. I think what might be more interesting to Adobe is showing that > Royale can help these creatives create web content or help Adobe create > its web content. I would like to not spend too much more time on my > Royale Website POC, so if you can help me bring it closer to looking like > your WP version of the site by telling me the fonts and colors, then not > only will we be able to make the other parts of our site like the TryItNow > and ASDoc look more consistent, but I will have a better story if I need > to try to convince Adobe that Royale is worth the money they are spending > on it. Right now, the POC doesn't look close enough, so it is unlikely to > be convincing. > Hi, I understand your point, but the main problem for me here is that I think we are missing the main goal, or maybe the main goal has changed. For me Royale was about to make something with the essence of Flex that help to build Applications easily like we did with Flex in the past. If the main focus is to make good looking websites, I think that's not the reason I'm here, since for that task there's lots of options out there to work HTML sites quick and easy. I think we don't give value to our users with that main goal. But again, if that's the global feeling, I'm not the person how will stop that, but simply my focus will change since is not interesting to me. > > Of course, I could be wrong, but I am always looking for other ways to > justify my full-time assignment to Apache, and I would appreciate your > help instead of telling me not to work on it. > Alex, we all know that we can do what we want as that's the Apache moto. I only want to express why I'm surprised of the paths things are going since I thought our main focus was to have: * A good set of tools and languages to make Applications (MXML, AS3, compilers...) * A good set of UI Components and controls * A fast methodology of development (based on most of the Flex knowledge we get from the past years but with great new points like Strands/beads, PAYG, and more) For me to do a website is something collateral that is great in the end, as a "result", but if I try to put some components to work and that components still not work or are looking very raw, I think the final user will not want to use Royale. Hope you all see this as a constructive critic and to help us to define the way better. I'm always a democratic person and if all you think UI Components are less prior that get a website, I'll assume that. But I think is great to know how global interest are right now for all people here. Thanks! > > Thanks, > -Alex > > > >2018-01-03 13:07 GMT+01:00 Gabe Harbs <[email protected]>: > > > >> I agree. > >> > >> > On Jan 3, 2018, at 6:57 AM, Olaf Krueger <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > I would just like to mention that from my point of view it I would be > >> really > >> > helpful to have a first Royale release soon, e.g. 0.9.0. > >> > After that, Royale could evolve by minor versions like 0.9.1, 0.9.2, > >>etc. > >> > > >> > I agree with Carlos that there is still a way to go regarding missing > >> stuff > >> > and the developer experience but I think we should address those > >>things > >> to > >> > the first major release 1.0.0. > >> > I also agree that there is a danger that folks who starts with > >>exploring > >> > Royale will be dissapointed and leave. To avoid this we should mention > >> > anywhere and as often as possible that Royale is still under > >> development... > >> > but also ready for building apps. > >> > > >> > AFAIK Josh is on hold with his VSCode extension until the first Royale > >> > version is released. > >> > And maybe other users from the Flex lists who doesn't follow all those > >> posts > >> > are lost cause Royale acts a bit in the dark at the moment. > >> > I could imagine that users who would like to get in touch with Royale > >> don't > >> > want to start with the FlexJS version but also don't know where to > >>find a > >> > appropriate Royale version. > >> > > >> > I am trying to work as often as possible on our little TryItNow app > >>using > >> > Royale. > >> > I started from scratch and I really hope to provide this app with a > >>nice > >> > look and feel which follows Carlos website design. If this will be > >> > successful we'll have one part of the Royale website that is > >>implemented > >> by > >> > using Royale at least. > >> > > >> > Just my 2 cents, > >> > Olaf > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Sent from: > >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > http%3A%2F%2Fapache-ro > >>yale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui% > 40adobe.com > >>%7Cd8b185e854b74ee1fdd908d552b9681b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > cee1%7C > >>0%7C0%7C636505878630565332&sdata=v11mPW8we9iRyky% > 2BgOHm5MuO9gFPZhLltmrpKx > >>G5TR0%3D&reserved=0 > >> > >> > > > > > >-- > >Carlos Rovira > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2 > >Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com% > 7Cd8b185e854b74ee1fdd908d5 > >52b9681b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0% > 7C636505878630565332&s > >data=m7q6OxWrgWTx9USLwzqVeQotZ%2Fvgm2eB7Ys0XpkxaSU%3D&reserved=0 > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
