Carlos, That's wonderful news! I'm happy that has happened! :)
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018, 11:56 PM Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Alex, > > my thoughts on this are various: My perspective of Adobe as a company > passed from a company that I love so much thanks to many products, and many > actions done in the past years (I think it coincides with "product managers > become CEOs of the tech company" and that is noticed in directions taken > with the technology and products)....to a company I hate so much, and even > removed the need to use any product that comes from Adobe, thanks to the > sum of movements (and not movements) in most all business Adobe did in the > past 8 years or so (maybe coinciding with "sales managers becoming CEOs of > a tech company", in concrete, of course, regarding to flash and flex, but > not only that as you or others could expect. > > Begin said that, my perspective has started to shift in the past months, > thanks to this concrete donation of the work of Peter and you. But, my > feeling about this is that we are reaching a good point, we are near, but > still are not there. So removing Peter and you now, will be like to run a > race just to stay a few meters from the finish line. I think community > perspective will be bad if Adobe do that. Probably #flash2020, and Apache > Royale 1.0 would be an inflection point since is where all the work done, > people planning migration will. That's my vision if like you say Adobe want > people turns the bad feelings generated in the last years with all the > unfortunate movements. Start removing resources at 0.9.2 and 1'5 years > before the burst of the bomb doesn't seem the best strategy to do now for > Adobe (just IMHO). > > In the other hand. I must to say that my company (Codeoscopic) is ok to > migrate to Royale its main product. We're preparing the scenario to make > that happen, but the decision is already taken. I emailed some days ago > about this. So you can count another company in the process :). I think > this can be forwarded to your management team, that another company is > depending on the work you and Peter make this years, but in the work you > still need to do to make Royale a usable technology or what the same: > version 1.0. > > Begin said that, things like className discussion has been crucial in the > process, I think that's a little stone in the road, and my perception is > that in this list there's great minds in the development field, coding, > languages, servers, and so on... but although I share part of that > background, my needs, and the needs of many other people out there are as > well focused on design, art, ux, design software... and many other visual > things...and the way we manage styles in Royale was for me not capable > and/or acceptable of doing what people needs. The proof is that I had many > problems coding MDL (and we discussed at that time), and the same happened > with Jewel (and again we had to lost many emails in this topic)... I always > hit the same wall. And we need to discuss many emails to give lots of data > and argumentation to try to make you and others understand the > problems...problems that exists for people trying to "style" or "paint" the > things previously coded in Royale, and now that are hopefully solved, I can > continue coding Jewel more quickly. And all of this ends in a UI set that > finally is more visual, and that people could start to use as a flex > replacement, since I firmly believe that the visuals can make other come to > us, and without this problem solved (class name coding) and many others we > solved the last months (CSS mainly), Royale was not ready for get visual > things and that was a huge problem. For me more important that emulation > components (that I'll be referring more later...). > > So, for migrating out system, I need: > > * To have a minimun Jewel component set (for this, I still need to make > DateField, DateChooser, Autocomplete, and maybe a couple more components, > maybe Card?) - so this point is at +-70% > * Layouts. (I need to revise Jewel Layouts and make more robust, and maybe > use flex-box consistently though all of it ) - % difficult to say now > * Have RemoteObject/AMF : Maybe 100% complete but still need to try more > types of data communication > * Start a "Initial-POC" with my system that makes a login and get some > initial data with AMF. (0%, but this days I put some company pieces aligned > and I'm ready to start this) > I need to present this to the managers and responsible of the actual > system. Hope this could happen in the next 1-3 weeks. > > If "Initial-POC" works right, I think we'll have all needed to start > building a Royale client for our system. So this could happen in 1 month > from now depending of things needed. > Things I still didn't fight and I think are important are: Validators and > Formatters and Injection Framework (We use Swiz Framework), and still I > need to know if we can have something like Swiz in Royale (metadata, > injection,...). I assume this is possible. > > Another point I need to check are emulation components, I'll be checking in > some days, maybe post 0.9.3 release, and see how that could fit in our > migration strategy. For now, and since our Flex client is heavily relying > on Swiz Framework, for now seems that we have a path of "recreating the > client" from scratch, instead of emulate it and then change it...maybe we > are still a month behind to see this last part... > > ...but the first points are very clear to me. > > That's my vision on all of this explained with total sincerity. Hope that > helps, although I'm only one in hundreds or thousand of others out there... > > So for now, want to thank Adobe the donation of you and Peter's work, and > hope that could continue as we reach some important milestones ahead so > community could see Adobe again as we saw it before 2010. For me that point > is more in #flash2020 time point. > > Thanks > > Carlos > > > 2018-04-24 18:16 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: > > > This is not an official Adobe statement, just my personal opinion. Adobe > > is not "investing" in Apache Royale. Adobe is "generously donating > > resources". Probably well past one million dollars so far. An > investment > > usually has an expected payback. A charitable donation does not. Adobe > is > > unlikely to try to build a business around Royale. > > > > So the factors that affect Peter's assignment on Royale and my assignment > > on Royale have nothing to do with "if Adobe spends a bit more they will > > make more money". It is simply, "how much do we (Adobe) want to spend on > > goodwill". Those of you who personally give to charities probably have > > some way of evaluating which charities to give to. Adobe is in the same > > situation in terms of donating resources to open source projects at > Apache > > and elsewhere. It has to make sense to them from a "what do our > customers > > think of our company" perspective. > > > > If some major Adobe customers decided to use Royale, that would make it > > more important to Adobe to make sure they are successful. But we have > not > > done that so far. Instead we spend our time rewriting how we manage > > classNames, nitpicking about licensing, and discussing lots of other > things > > when I would much rather we prove that we can help a second customer > > migrate. And then a third customer. I believe if we had already somehow > > attracted that third customer and they were an important Adobe customer, > > Peter would not have been re-assigned. > > > > This is Apache, so you can scratch any itch you want, but when I do any > > work on Royale, my eyes are always on how I can keep convincing my > > management to keep donating, not keep investing. And my management cares > > little about the internals and much more about who our users are. > > > > My 2 cents, > > -Alex > > > > On 4/24/18, 7:59 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos > > Rovira" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash > Player > > will > > be removed from Browsers. > > So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache Royale. > Both > > users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and > Royale > > becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I > envision > > Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React that > > this > > years have been the "middle step" to something like we are creating > > here. > > So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since I > > truly > > think we can make a difference > > > > C. > > > > > > > > 2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <[email protected]>: > > > > > Hi Peter, > > > > > > >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... > > > > > > Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann > > Hesse, > > > German poem) ;-) > > > However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to > > convince > > > Adobe to let you continue working on Royale! > > > My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer > > > Announcement", we have much more attention. > > > And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has > > to be > > > migrated. > > > So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want > to > > > continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex > > apps with > > > as little effort as possible... by using Royale! > > > > > > I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff! > > > > > > Thank you for all that work, Peter! > > > Olaf > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > > http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble. > > com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3 > > fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0% > > 7C636601787726789792&sdata=2ZNZcdyDt9go76qv6%2FtjuMQ0oxojJdlJW1vpqgof1yU% > > 3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com% > > 7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > > cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=3i%2B%2FtdQ% > > 2BIFTA0xDCTZTuW6OQBhh0AbDpRA8ObSnwLEM%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira >
