We (the Royale project) told Alina that we thought it was feasible to have her
migrate her app by September. This was before you started your effort, and you
did not ask for opinions of other PMC members before you engaged your client.
It is now November, almost December. We are way behind schedule.
The change I made was discussed to fix a complaint by others. You are
reverting that fix, returning others to a problem. What technical flaw do you
find in the changes I made? Just because something isn't working for you in an
un-explained way doesn't mean that you can go break others just to fix your
problem. I am not making changes for myself, I am making changes for others.
Can you make the same claim?
-Alex
On 11/25/18, 3:49 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote:
Alex,
"you shouldn't make everyone else pay a price to save you time"
For me this seems what you did, why don't put yourself in the skin of
others?
"You didn't need to make that change in the repo, you could have worked off
a branch"
Saying that Is again the same, if you break a think but you think you must
break that in pro of what you're pursuing, why you ask others to make a
branch? is more special the change you want to make than the changes of
others?
Apache way is where all are equals, and try to pursue a common objetive,
but in this case, don't know others, but I clearly don't know what you want
to do, but are you asking me to fix that or spend money paying others to do
something I still don't know the objective.
Simply don't understand that position.
I have a clearly dead line this Friday to show a client our progress in our
Apache Royale real application. Do you have some dead line as well that I'm
not aware that explain to be so inflexible with this issue? I mean in order
to try to understand you position.
El lun., 26 nov. 2018 a las 0:36, Carlos Rovira (<carlosrov...@apache.org>)
escribió:
> Hi Alex,
>
> don't think that's a good attitude. I'm just trying to solve a thing
> broken in the repo, and proposing a change. You essentially did a change
> that break things, and you're not taking care of the side effects of doing
> that. I'm already paying other people to fix things, but I don't think I
> have pay someone to fix something you broke. When I break thinks I use to
> try to help as much as I can, remember when I change many files and people
> report breaking things, I was some days helping and spending hours to fix
> things for others, since I considere I'm responsible of my changes. I'm
now
> trying to fix a things you break, and made a change that solves it. You
> think is not ok, but I don't know what's your goal, and why you did that
> change, but you're asking me to spend hours in deal with a change you did.
> Simply don't understand that position.
>
> Remember that I said in my previous email that I already spend yesterday
> complete morning to deal with you change, I can't get nothing that solve.
> You know what try to do, why don't you take care of my suggestion and help
> to create a config file that addresses the problem so you and I can
> continue out work?
>
>
>
>
>
> El dom., 25 nov. 2018 a las 23:28, Alex Harui (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>)
> escribió:
>
>> By putting all SWCs back in the library-path in royale-config, you have
>> re-introduced a problem I was fixing. You can say you didn't revert the
>> actual git commit, but your changes essentially undid my commit. The
build
>> passed with my commit, as far as I can tell. IF we all start reverting
>> stuff we don't like, we'll just end up in a revert war. We are all in a
>> time-crunch, not just you. This is cutting-edge development. Things may
>> get in your way some times, but you shouldn't make everyone else pay a
>> price to save you time. You didn't need to make that change in the repo,
>> you could have worked off a branch. If you run into a bug, you'll have
to
>> take the time to investigate or hire someone to do it if none of the
other
>> volunteers happen to have time.
>>
>> My 2 cents,
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 11/25/18, 1:56 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> El dom., 25 nov. 2018 a las 8:34, Alex Harui
>> (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>)
>> escribió:
>>
>> > Does configname make any difference in your IDE? Maybe the IDE
>> doesn't
>> > support it. The compiler output should switch to saying it is
>> loading
>> > flex-config instead of royale-config.
>> >
>> >
>> I think there's tow ways, one using addtiionalCompiler options like I
>> show.
>> Another from the AS3&MXML extension is "config: royale" or "config:
>> flex"
>> (values can be as well "air", and others)
>>
>>
>> > The change you made to royale-config-template re-introduces the
>> problem I
>> > was trying to fix. IMO, you should make a local change in a branch
>> instead
>> > of reverting my commits.
>> >
>>
>> I didn't revert your commit, just do a new one to be reverted, since
>> it
>> seems to be something goes wrong with the changes. For your words I
>> understand there's no bugs or things to take care to solve this?
>>
>>
>> > I recommend that you compare the set of manifests loaded by
>> flex-config vs
>> > royale-config. It looks like some are missing. And you are
>> welcome to
>> > make another config.xml for your combination. The problem with
>> having
>> > "everything" in a -config.xml is that it can add too many options
to
>> > code-hinting.
>> >
>>
>> Ok, the problem is that I spend yesterday morning trying to see
>> something
>> similar but only the actual patch worked.
>> I tried to add to royale config the MXRoyale.swc for SWF and JS and
>> namespace, but that didn't make a difference. Do you know what's the
>> problem starting from that point? or if the approach is not that?
>>
>> I think I can create one for Jewel applications, and remove from that
>> sets
>> that are just experiments but not usable like createjs, flat, express
>> More over, could revert my change and create a
>> "jewel-config-template.xml"
>> to test that is possible? I was not able to do it yesterday so maybe
>> there's a problem and is not possible right now
>>
>> I'll be out until today until night, and will catch up if you commit
>> something to try it. I understand that would be using
>> addtionalcompiler
>> options path with +configname
>>
>> Another thing that could be good is the one you already commented
>> about
>> separate MXRoyale in MX Rpc, Formatters, and more, to help in this
>> way to
>> code intelligence in IDEs to have only the right libraries the users
>> is
>> using
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Carlos
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>> > HTH,
>> > -Alex
>> >
>> >
>> > On 11/24/18, 7:04 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > after doing full rebuild I'm finding a problem in IDE (not in
>> build)
>> > with
>> > the new change +configname=flex
>> >
>> > - we are using Jewel and MXRoyale, just por MX RPC (and maybe
>> some
>> > other
>> > class in MX).
>> > - we are using several libraries and one application
>> >
>> > today I found that all MX code throws error in VS Code and is
>> not
>> > recognize. I see the change about configname. To adapt our
>> config
>> > project
>> > to this, I added to each asconfig file in all royale libs and
>> app in
>> > our
>> > project the line
>> >
>> > "additionalOptions": "+configname=flex"
>> >
>> > but this doesn't solves the problem
>> >
>> > in fact I'm seeing more problems like
>> >
>> > In initializer for 'j:icon', type
>> org.apache.royale.icons.FontIcon is
>> > not
>> > assignable to target type 'org.apache.royale.core.IIcon'.
>> > Implicit coercion of a value with static type MouseEvent to a
>> possibly
>> > unrelated type MouseEvent.
>> > In initializer for 'j:previousButton', type
>> > org.apache.royale.jewel.Group
>> > is not assignable to target type
>> 'org.apache.royale.core.UIBase'.
>> > Ambiguous reference to MouseEvent
>> >
>> > and many more
>> >
>> > This makes hundreds of errors and makes the IDE unusable. I
>> suppose
>> > that
>> > this change not block people waning to use a mix of libraries,
>> and is
>> > just
>> > a matter to know how to update configuration, right? I mean if
>> someone
>> > wants to use in the same application three different buttons(
>> jewel,
>> > basic,
>> > and mx/spark), that should still be possible right?
>> >
>> > What should I do in my project configuration to solve this
>> problem?
>> >
>> > thanks
>> >
>> > --
>> > Carlos Rovira
>> >
>> >
>>
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb7e385d10cee49de88de08d653309558%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636787865492987762&sdata=hjOwZj7r7CCaqRQwXK%2FN6SayOpHLxdk1bkTvPZptPAw%3D&reserved=0
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Carlos Rovira
>>
>>
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb7e385d10cee49de88de08d653309558%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636787865492987762&sdata=hjOwZj7r7CCaqRQwXK%2FN6SayOpHLxdk1bkTvPZptPAw%3D&reserved=0
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
>
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb7e385d10cee49de88de08d653309558%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636787865492987762&sdata=hjOwZj7r7CCaqRQwXK%2FN6SayOpHLxdk1bkTvPZptPAw%3D&reserved=0
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb7e385d10cee49de88de08d653309558%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636787865492987762&sdata=hjOwZj7r7CCaqRQwXK%2FN6SayOpHLxdk1bkTvPZptPAw%3D&reserved=0
