That's another strategy for the long term "if" Emulation has a minimum acceptable look & feel, that's not the case "today". So, to make the effort to move from the 2 migration process at once, I decided to rewrite directly in Jewel and JewelTheme :)
>From what I check now, Jewel components seem to fill the most needs (fortunately, I don't need a tree at all) except for Advanced Datagrid, that's a blocker. Another approach to try to emulate my needs about Advanced DG is to workaround with tabs and bold in normal Datagrid and rows enabled and disabled (I don't know if would be possible). I will check later. Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> escreveu no dia segunda, 29/06/2020 à(s) 09:56: > One thing you could try in the current state of Royale is: > > 1.- Make a first pass from Flex to Royale with Emularion. That should be > very few changes. > 2.- From a Royale version, add Jewel and JewelTheme and change most > components to the jewel (j) namespace. > 3.- Change controls: > > - Things like buttons, checkboxes, datefields, numericstepper, should > have a very similar API or the same > - Jewel List should be very close too since it is very evolved. > - Then others like ComboBox, DropDownList, could need more attention by > using beads (for example RequireSelection is a bead not a property) > - For components still not available in Jewel like Tree and > AdvancedDataGrid, you can maintain them in emulation until we have jewel > versions. > > 4.- Go further and start changing containers and layouts: > > - Layouts in Jewel is more efficient since it uses (when possible) > browser layout, avoiding extra process > - Containers tries to have the best from flex and the best from the > modern web and Royale and use jewel layouts. > > 5.- If needed and make sense for your app: Try to add some new > global layout like the one exposed in TDJ that uses Drawer and > Responsiveness to make the App more accessible in Tablets and Mobile > devices. > > > > > El dom., 28 jun. 2020 a las 15:10, Hugo Ferreira (<hferreira...@gmail.com > >) > escribió: > > > I'm using the Nabble. > > It worked every time before and from the last months to now, it works 1 > in > > 10 times. > > I will use e-mail. > > I already configured the mailing list to receive every message. > > > > I tested Apache Royal Emulation a year ago and was an alpha quality > > product. > > I practically could not do much to it from my trial. > > > > I tested now I can tell for my very short trial that I almost copy/past > and > > change very few things and compile straight and see running on the > browser, > > however without any skin (tested with version 0.9.7). > > > > MX Emulation it's OK for internal purposes as you said but for public > Jewel > > it's the way. > > However MX Emulation can be done probably in a record time and Jewel with > > not be a port but a rewrite that can take a lot of time and a learning > > curve. > > > > I'm "playing" with Jewel right now. > > > > Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> escreveu no dia domingo, > > 28/06/2020 à(s) 10:57: > > > > > I think sooner or later someone make Emulation Components beautiful. I > > > hope there will appear on horizonts client who would pay to make it > > happen. > > > Even if it maybe more work he will still benefits cause his code will > be > > > migrated to JS without so much changes. > > > > > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 10:58 AM Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Hugo, > > >> > > >> actually I see 2 paths in Royale for Flex apps migration: > > >> > > >> 1.- Choose MX emulation: That's the fastest migration path with very > few > > >> code changes, but look and feel is not considered > > >> 2.- Choose Jewel or other UI set that consider look and feel. That > will > > be > > >> not so fast as MX but will give you look and feel out of the box. > > >> > > >> Depending on your needs you must choose one path or the other. If the > > app > > >> is something internal to a company (i.e: an intranet) that just needs > to > > >> continue working, I think 1 is a good option. If you need to go open > and > > >> look and feel is important, maybe 2 is a better way since it prepares > > your > > >> app for modern UI. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> El dom., 28 jun. 2020 a las 6:59, Piotr Zarzycki (< > > >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>) > > >> escribió: > > >> > > >> > Hi Hugo, > > >> > > > >> > Did you overcome your problems with mailing list? > > >> > > > >> > As for your question - I don't things anyone tried make Emulation > > >> > Components beautiful, with some decent css styles. So far any new > > >> client of > > >> > Royale just trying to reach porting app without thinking about make > UI > > >> > beautiful. > > >> > > > >> > You may try and see, but I would really recommend first see whether > > your > > >> > app is be able to smoothly build trough Royale. Over the road you > may > > >> find > > >> > how things work. > > >> > > > >> > Thanks, > > >> > Piotr > > >> > > > >> > On Sun, Jun 28, 2020, 6:18 AM Hugo Ferreira <hferreira...@gmail.com > > > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > Hello, > > >> > > > > >> > > How to apply a theme/skin to Royale Emulation ? > > >> > > The standard version seems wireframes. > > >> > > For example Google Material Design. > > >> > > > > >> > > Regards, > > >> > > Hugo. > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Carlos Rovira > > >> http://about.me/carlosrovira > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira >
