It might be that we decide that DataGroup does belong in Core with a “core” package path, but I don’t even think there’s a list of classes which were changed. Maybe there are too many. Maybe there are others which should be changed. Maybe we’ll decide that it’s not worth it to change any. I don’t know.
Changing package paths is not something we should do lightly, and if we do make changes, it should only happen in a single release and all changes should be carefully considered. There has not been nearly enough discussion on that yet. Thanks, Harbs > On May 17, 2018, at 11:10 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Carlos, > > The problem is that any existing applications which subclass or import > DataGroup (for example) will break by upgrading to 0.9.3. We don’t want > release breaking changes unless we decide that breaking changes are necessary. > > We are still discussing that whole topic and this release will likely happen > before that discussion is finished. > > IMO, it’s better to release less features than release breaking changes which > might be reverted. > > Thanks, > Harbs > >> On May 17, 2018, at 11:05 AM, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Hi Harbs, >> >> that was returned to the old way, actually we have the same than before >> refactor: >> >> import org.apache.royale.html.Group; >> >> public class NodeElementBase extends Group >> >> Maybe the problem is that we don't have any example of ButtonBar in >> examples? and thus I was not aware of that concrete component? >> >> I'll try to see that and if we need, I'll create and example now for that. >> >> The change to solve this in your code base is really easy and direct: >> >> search all "import org.apache.royale.html.supportClasses.DataGroup;" and >> replace with "import org.apache.royale.core.DataGroup;" >> >> (for me is clear that DataGroup is a Core piece, that will be used not as >> Basic or Jewel implementation, but as a "core" piece used for the rest of >> UI sets) >> >> I'll be looking at it right now >> >> Thanks for exposing it! :) >> >> Carlos >> >> >> >> 2018-05-17 8:49 GMT+02:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>: >> >>> Having trouble getting this email to “take”. Trying a paste link instead... >>> >>> It looks like it does have issues. >>> >>> I just pulled the 0.9.3 branch. >>> >>> I get a lot of these warnings when I compile the framework: >>> https://paste.apache.org/Wy9t <https://paste.apache.org/Wy9t> >>> >>> I used it to compile my app, and I get runtime errors due to missing >>> components. This seems to be due to HTML not subclassing Group. >>> >>> Here’s an example of elements which go AWAL: >>> https://paste.apache.org/s9og <https://paste.apache.org/s9og> >>> >>> Everything below “ul" is missing. >>> >>> Harbs >>> >>>> On May 16, 2018, at 10:45 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID >>> <mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'm pretty sure the branches were cut before the changes in question. >>> You can pull down the branches and build them to verify. Or look at their >>> history on GitHub. >>>> >>>> Om, did you see a date for when Maven SCM would be released? The only >>> response I got from the Maven folks was to build Maven SCM from sources. >>> If it is going to be more than a week, I might actually try that. >>>> >>>> -Alex >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Carlos Rovira >> http://about.me/carlosrovira >
