Thanks for the quick reply Alex. I am keen to get the mx DataGrid support in as soon as possible. So at the moment I am inclined to go with the single commit approach which we both agree provides a simple revert option if it was ever needed. But I will wait one day to see if others have different views.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 12:03 PM Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: > Alina is out on parenting leave. Pashmina is driving the effort on that > project. She had a deadline for 4/30 so it would be risky to make big > changes to ADG right now. On the other hand if it is all in one commit > they can revert the commit. > > I'm not sure they are working every day where they live. There were no > emails from Pashmina today, IIRC. So if you can wait 72 hours before > committing might be safer, but like I said, Pashmina can revert the commit > and use a local build. > > -Alex > > On 4/29/20, 4:42 PM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I checked with Alex recently on status for mx DataGrid and understood > it > needed work. I need mx DataGrid for a low level dependency in some > client > work, so I have worked on that. > I know mx ADG is in a working state, so my goal was to get mx DataGrid > into > a similar state that allows for initial use, and for subsequent > improvement. > > In doing so I have also addressed a couple of bugs I saw in ADG: > 1. clicking on the sort headers caused selection behaviour in list area > 2.sortable="false" was not being respected from DataGridColumns (did > not > disable sort for that header button) > > I need a definitive preference/answer for whether it is ok for me to > push > my changes to develop or if current ADG users want these to go to a > branch > for now. This could be from Alina (or Alex on her behalf) or anyone > else > who is currently using mx ADG. More information follows... if I hear > nothing by this time tomorrow I will assume a single commit to develop > with > the changes will be ok (see explanation below, about how this minimises > potential risk to others) > > Details: > I don't know how many others are using ADG (I know Alina is for sure). > As > part of the work on mx DataGrid I did refactor some things from ADG > down to > lower level classes, leveraging as much as I could of what Alex had > already > done, to permit shared use of lower level code in some cases between > the > two DataGrid classes. Mostly this mirrored the original Flex code, but > in some cases it was more Royale-like for the 'under-the-hood' support > in > things like layout, for example. > So I want to check how I should migrate these changes into develop > because > I have made some changes to ADG itself. If others currently using ADG > prefer, I can add it to a branch for now, but I do need commitment > that you > will check that branch so I can merge into develop in a short > timeframe. > Or, more practically I think, I can make this as a single commit into > develop that is easily reverted if there are any issues that arise in > ADG > as a result (I don't expect any - it should be fine, but I don't want > to > cause problems if there is anything that does arise from this change - > if > anything *that currently works* in ADG stops working after this > change, I > will address it) > > Other things: > For mx DataGrid I used non-virtualized list layout for now. I could see > some issues in ADG with fast mouse wheel scrolling glitching sometimes > with > the virtualized renderers (so far only on Chromium browsers I think). > I did > not want to deal with for now, so mx DataGrid is initially > 'non-virtualized' and I can come back to this and add virtualized > renderer > support at some later point. > I made mx.controls.Image work as a drop-in itemRenderer. This probably > needs review, because I had to change its implementation to be more > nested > in terms of native element representation. Perhaps that is not > necessary, > but it does permit something closer to the original for layout (it is > still > not 100% correct for drop-in itemrenderer). This change in Image is not > tied to the other changes in the DataGrid classes, it was just an > attempt > to get something working better for 'drop-in' ItemRenderers (e.g. > itemRenderer="mx.controls.Image" in this case). So it could be handled > as > separate (either fix any issues or revert). > > > You can see the current state of this here (the blue rectangles on the > right are just mx:Image instances, testing some layout behavior after > changes to that component to match Flex originals): > > Flex original (reference implementation): > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Finteractionscript.com%2Froyale%2Fmx-grids%2Fflex-original%2FMain.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C66ad5498632d4a7d613408d7ec96ee72%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637238005298074875&sdata=17NEm%2BvOqLXer7EcLmpdJ3qEZegJBY7lViKnSXmOjZk%3D&reserved=0 > > Emulation: > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Finteractionscript.com%2Froyale%2Fmx-grids%2Femulation%2Fjs-release%2Findex.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C66ad5498632d4a7d613408d7ec96ee72%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637238005298074875&sdata=8YjuLwGd%2FOlqLXURhD0bJZz2Da12AZyUIzh9qBo1MhQ%3D&reserved=0 > > I will add this example to mxroyale examples when I push. If you want > to > take a look at the source and both ant and maven builds now, you can > get > that here; > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Finteractionscript.com%2Froyale%2Fmx-grids%2Femulation%2FDataGridExample.zip&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C66ad5498632d4a7d613408d7ec96ee72%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637238005298074875&sdata=8y6W%2FuVbh4QCDokw3WaPOdbkFj86MB7xXw1%2BUYWLPmg%3D&reserved=0 > > >
