Hi Alex, you're right, our case (Codeoscopic Application to migrate) uses modules extensively too, so Modules is for me very needed, and will be for any serious royale application out there. I want to have SWF side as well, and I'll try it as I get some time. As you say, we should:
1.- get at least bounding boxes and event handlers working so we could see a "ugly" interface that layouts correctly and work correctly, but doesn't look pretty at that time 2.- make it match HTML look and feel For me 1 is important, and we can delay 2 for now, since we need to get more a more needed components on Jewel. In the other hand, I can at some time, help on making MXRoyale look like MX and Spark...but I think there's much to do now to think on that, and I don't mind if that components doesn't look good right now. I think MX and Spark need work flawlessly for now and have at least bounding boxes on screen and events working. Thanks Carlos 2018-04-25 18:36 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: > Hi Carlos, > > I think these components are going to look ugly for a little while > longer. Also, I have been trying to get them to work for SWF output as > well because Alina's app uses modules extensively and having the Flash > version verify interfaces could be a huge time savings. Eventually, I hope > that we can replace the views in the emulation components with Jewel > views. The SWF version of the Jewel views don't have to look great, it > just has to take up the same space on the screen. We just want to make > sure we can run most of the code paths through the verifier. > > If you have time to try mocking the visuals for SWF that would be > interesting to see. > > I'm mainly saying that I don't think blog posts about these components is > going to look nearly as attractive as the Jewel blog posts > > My 2 cents, > -Alex > > On 4/25/18, 1:32 AM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos > Rovira" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > 2018-04-25 9:39 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <[email protected]>: > > > 120 MX classes compile. Only six MX UI components work at all. > There are > > examples in examples/mxroyale. We have not started on Spark. > > > > That sounds very good. Congrats! > > > > > > In mustella/mxtests is a copy of the flex-sdk checkintest. The > first six > > tests run without modification (actually a few tests that tested > internals > > were disabled). That's actually a fair amount of work because to > get that > > much to run we had to emulate Application and states and some > containers as > > well. > > > > But like I said in another thread. This is a new effort and I have > been > > distracted by other things and haven't spent nearly as much time on > this as > > I had hoped, and wished more existing committers would help. > Getting all > > of this to compile is a fair amount of work. Getting it to run is > going to > > be a serious effort. Expecting that we'd get MX and Spark working > in this > > short amount of time is not realistic. > > > > Alex, I think is not realistic to think we can get people on board > showing > Basic examples, or thinks that "doesn't look good". For me, I had a > long > journey to start producing things that looks in a way we can blog, > twit and > so on..., so what you see wasn't worth it, for me is the key factor. > > Now I can start to spread the word about this effort in social > networks. I > tried the examples, but need to fix poms to build with maven. I'll do > it > today in order to see it working. > > If we can show that work, and make people out there know about it, > maybe we > can bring you more people to help in that effort. > > Thanks > > Carlos > > > > > > My 2 cents, > > -Alex > > > > On 4/24/18, 3:40 PM, "[email protected] on behalf of Carlos > > Rovira" <[email protected] on behalf of > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > I was wondering if there's some example of the emulation > components to > > show > > the work done > > Something that aggregates all mx and spark components that we > have now > > emulated? > > I'm interested in watch what we have actually. > > > > thanks! > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui% > 40adobe.com% > > 7Cc891b5522835498199f008d5aa345bd8%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > > cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636602064300395249&sdata=M%2BTgzk0xPfCEFDikU2% > > 2B1QFINpCpLImtJu4qHbjm6da4%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com% > 7C052d802e5387439f45f308d5aa871bc1%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636602419622998891&sdata=1BL0npo7ghXprH5aP17Ftt% > 2BzryTKk9r56uyjdGePObg%3D&reserved=0 > > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
