maybe better saying what's in and not what's out. For example
"royale-simple-js-only" ?

just my 2 :)

2018-04-24 8:36 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>:

> IMO, "simple" is too subjective.  IMO, the name should indicate the key
> differentiators.  So "no-swf" might be part of the name.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 4/23/18, 11:59 AM, "Peter Ent" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     I picked "Foundation" because "Basic" was taken and I was thinking of
>     "foundation classes". I guess I should have been more open on the list
>     that I was creating a new set of components. I did this as a fun task
> for
>     myself while I was discharging all of the thoughts on Royale Basic in
> my
>     head about these years in FlexJS/Royale and I wanted to preserve those
>     thoughts. I did not intend this to be disruptive in any way; I didn't
>     think people would be obliged to look at it right away (or even at all
> if
>     they didn't feel interested).
>
>     Perhaps it is best if I rename the repository. How do you feel about
>     "royale-simple"? I think "simple" is good because the classes are not
> that
>     complex.
>
>     I have been asked why I thought this was necessary to do and if I
> looked
>     at the MDL project to see about leveraging it. I did not look at MDL (I
>     did follow MDL when it was being developed but it has been a long
> while),
>     but I have today gone back and looked at some key classes.
>
>     First, this project was not necessary to fill any deficiencies in
> Royale.
>     This was, as I said above, just a fun project for me. I like to write
>     code. There's something very creative about starting with a nearly
> blank
>     slate and producing something, even if something like already exists.
>
>     One main thing I did that is different from MDL and Basic, is that I
> made
>     everything inherit from a common base class - UIComponent. In Basic
> (and
>     MDL), buttons are different due to their SWF-side implementation. I
> made
>     Buttons a UIComponent and I made the Application a UIComponent as
> well. I
>     also enhanced IUIBase and added other properties. I also wanted to
> give it
>     some Flex-like appeal so I kept some of the same class names that I
> liked;
>     I was inspired by revisiting Flex recently.
>
>     There is nothing wrong with what we have created in Royale. I think it
> is
>     a testament to its design that a new framework can be added without
> much
>     work and demonstrates to people that they can make their own frameworks
>     using Apache Royale as their starting point.
>
>     I'll wait a few days and if there are no objections, I'll rename
>     "royale-foundation" to "royale-simple".
>
>     Thanks,
>     Peter
>
>
>     On 4/22/18, 7:55 PM, "Niclas Hedhman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>     >If this goes forward, I hope to see a different name... Apache Royale
>     >Foundation sounds like some daughter/sibling organization of Apache
>     >Software Foundation.
>     >
>     >I.e. I understand that "Foundation" here is similar to that of
> Microsoft
>     >Foundation Classes, but due to ASF's name, I think it is unfortunate
> if
>     >this name persist.
>     >
>     >My 2 cent
>     >Niclas
>     >
>     >On Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 00:37 Peter Ent <[email protected]> wrote:
>     >
>     >> Hi,
>     >>
>     >> As many of you know, over five years ago Adobe Systems donated Flex
> to
>     >>the
>     >> Apache Foundation. My time on this mission is drawing to a close in
> a
>     >> couple of weeks. I am actively trying to find a new position within
>     >>Adobe.
>     >> I hope to continue to participate in the Royale project, but that
> may be
>     >> determined by my next employer/manager.
>     >>
>     >> In the meantime, I decided to look back through all my notes and
> ideas
>     >>and
>     >> I created a "thesis" project to express what I've learned and to
> leave
>     >>my
>     >> ideas out there for others to use.
>     >>
>     >> I've created what I call "Apache Royale Foundation" - an
> alternative to
>     >> the Basic project in Royale. I have this stored in a public
>     >>repository[1],
>     >> separate from royale-asjs. The Foundation project (in
>     >>frameworks/projects)
>     >> would be a sibling to Basic, but I needed to make a few changes to
> the
>     >>Core
>     >> project and I did not want take the chance of messing up the
> royale-asjs
>     >> repository, even with a separate branch. I just felt it was safer to
>     >>make a
>     >> new public repo using my Apache Github account.
>     >>
>     >> The royale-foundation repo is a downsized version of royale-asjs. I
> took
>     >> only a handful of projects from frameworks (e.g., Core, Network)
> that I
>     >> thought I could make use of either directly in Foundation or in
>     >>examples. I
>     >> set up the commits to first put in the downsized code, then changes
> to
>     >> Core, then the main Foundation classes. This way you can see what
>     >>changes
>     >> were made to Core (mainly to IUIBase and a just a few others).
>     >>
>     >> For a more detailed explanation of Foundation, I wrote a Wiki
> page[2] to
>     >> go with the code. I really wanted to see what writing an
>     >> almost-from-scratch framework involved. I decided to ignore the
> Flash
>     >> Player and concentrate exclusively on HTML/JS. While
> royale-foundation
>     >>will
>     >> build something on the SWF side, it will either not run or produce
> just
>     >>a
>     >> blank window. This was a fun project to fill the time and improve my
>     >> JavaScript and CSS skills while looking for my next challenge.
>     >>
>     >> I could not have done this without the Core project and the work of
>     >> everyone who has contributed to Royale. There are a lot of
> background
>     >> pieces that go into make a framework viable and I made use of them
> as
>     >>much
>     >> as possible.
>     >>
>     >> I suggest starting with the Wiki[2] before looking at the code[1].
> Once
>     >> you do get the code, you should be able to build it using ANT (I
> did not
>     >> modify the maven pom files yet) and then build the examples.
>     >>
>     >> [1] Apache Royale Foundation Repo:
>     >>
>     >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
>     >>om%2Fpentapache%2Froyale-foundation&data=02%7C01%7Cpent%40adobe.com
> %7C5cf
>     >>7d87b0ef34ce3818c08d5a8aca1d9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%
>     >>7C636600381788184543&sdata=gpllo0jYdNsp%
> 2FWQm0R7Lxi57l4muoyWX7Tf9YKZaF%2F
>     >>Y%3D&reserved=0
>     >>
>     >> [2] Apache Royale Foundation Wiki (in the Repo):
>     >>
>     >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
>     >>om%2Fpentapache%2Froyale-foundation%2Fwiki&data=02%7C01%7Cpent%
> 40adobe.co
>     >>m%7C5cf7d87b0ef34ce3818c08d5a8aca1d9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7
>     >>C0%7C0%7C636600381788184543&sdata=MtF1eGblWYuSi%
> 2F3nBxEulYrJg%2Fz5u6FliZt
>     >>2SjT%2F0po%3D&reserved=0
>     >>
>     >> Regards,
>     >> Peter Ent
>     >>
>     >>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Reply via email to