Totally agree with Jesse's statements. Renaun
--- In [email protected], "JesterXL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Flash will be backwards compatible, like always. However, you'll either > have to use AMF0 for the defaultObjectEncoding property of > flash.net.NetConnection to allow it to work with old content. The optimized > changes to AMF packets + serialization/deserialization means that projects > like OpenAMF & AMFPHP will have to be modified to take advantage of them; > aka, read the new AMF format. > > I don't know how different the format is, but it wouldn't jump from AMF0 to > AMF3 if it didn't rock. Therefore, old content will still work as usually, > and you can still use Remoting with AMFPHP & OpenAMF. I've already tested > my existing content in Flash Player 8.5 and it works. > > What I've yet to see work yet is AMFPHP using AMF3, but I wouldn't expect > Patrick & the AMFPHP crew to start working on it until the player is in > later betas. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "hank williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 11:30 AM > Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Re: Flex2 and Amfphp is it possible ? > > > Philip, > > Thank you for taking the time to respond to this issue. I do appreciate it. > > But I do have a bit of a concern with what you are saying. It sounds > like you are saying that because of improvments in architecture or > performance, old style AMF remoting may not be possible, or may not be > possible easily. > > This just doesnt sound right. > > These are pretty high level Async protocols, and I cannot imagine any > speed or architectural change that would cause such things to be > unsuportable. Moreover the documentation and others from macromedia > have said that the low level protocol is supported just not the higher > layers. > > So, I appreciate your responding, but it would really be helpful to > understand the technical issues that cause you or others to say that > because of the AVM changes that this stuff may not be supportable. > Because, to me, it sounds like saying "due to speed and architecture > changes flash can no longer support the color RED". > > Regards > Hank > > On 12/16/05, Philip Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Sorry I'm jumping in late on this thread, but I was out of the office > > and I've been having email problems. > > > > To follow up on Matt's comment, you have to recognize that with this > > public alpha, we are releasing into the wild much earlier than usual, so > > not everything is resolved. We recognize that AS3/Flex 2 is a big change > > and that moving to it will require some people to rewrite code/change > > infrastructure. Part of the reason for releasing early is to make sure > > we struck the right balance between improving the architecture (which > > often causes breakage) and breaking things (which causes pain). The > > discussion here is definitely helpful in this regard. > > > > With Flex 2/AS3, we did not set out to break compatibility with existing > > Remoting implementations, but that may be a reality of the big changes > > we are making. As with every change, you have to make trade-offs between > > keeping backward compatibility and fixing things for the future. Our > > goal is to build a solid technical foundation that we can use in our own > > products and that others can use in their products; with this release, > > we decided making some painful changes was the right choice for the > > long-term. > > > > To address the specific question about Remoting, we will have more > > information about the future of other Adobe/Macromedia products that use > > Remoting soon as well as information about how other products that rely > > on AMF can make the migration to AS3. But I do want to set the > > expectation that this is going to be a migration, not an upgrade. Player > > 8.5 will continue to run content/applications published to Player 8 and > > below, but to take advantage of the radical performance and functional > > improvements in the new AVM, some things will have to be reimplemented. > > We are absolutely committed to helping the developer community make that > > change, whether they are buying Flex, Remoting or CF from us or > > something like AMFPHP, but at the moment we're in the middle of making > > that change ourselves, so you will have to be patient. > > > > Hope that helps, > > > > Phil Costa > > Group Product Manager, Flex > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of hank williams > > Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 7:25 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [flexcoders] Re: Flex2 and Amfphp is it possible ? > > > > To add just a little color to this, I use java on the server side, but > > POJOs are useless to me because I return almost all my data as > > ResutSet/RecordSet's. There are a variety of reasons for this including > > the pageablerecordset capability, but the bottom line is that's how I do > > it. Rewriting the old recordset code that supports AMF1, to me, is not > > at all sensitive to the needs of the developer base. And again, we > > don't even know if its possible. > > > > Matt from Adobe just said that he does not expect to be breaking > > anyone's workflows, but I am not sure if that just meant Brian, who is > > using Cold Fusion, but not FlapFlap since he is using AMFPHP. Given that > > PHP is currently the most popular server side tool in the world some > > statement of support for AMF1 would be helpful. > > > > But there are others that think that since AMFPHP is an open source > > "hack" and that Adobe has no obligation to maintain API compatibility or > > continuity with any existing protocol. Instant deprecation is no > > problem. > > > > If this is Adobe's position on this issue and to open source in general > > - or not, I would love to hear it directly from Adobe in clear, no > > nonsense terms. > > > > Therefore, if any Adobe management is listening, and if appropriate, > > just detach the below letter, sign and return. I will forward to the > > appropriate constituencies. > > > > <snip> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ----------------- > > December 16, 2006 > > > > From: Adobe > > To: Open Source Community > > Non Cold Fusion/FDS users > > PHP Users > > > > RE: The needless breaking of your existing server communication > > solution > > > > > > Screw You. > > > > > > Warmest Regards, > > > > > > ___________________________________________ > > Signed Adobe Management Team > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------ > > <snip> > > > > On 12/15/05, Brian Lesser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Dave, > > > This thread started with a query regarding using the open source AMF > > > PHP software that a number of people have been using for some time to > > > build Flash/AMF/PHP based applications. Developers in that space > > > naturally want to continue to use the server-side code base (in PHP) > > > they have been building out along with the new standalone Flex 2 IDE > > and AS3. > > > However, it appears from the Alpha, and from what I gather Mike has > > > been saying, that this will not be possible without reinventing a > > > number of > > > AS3 classes such as RecordSet from scratch. Perhaps worse, though I am > > > > > not into PHP, is that it may not be possible at all if any code relied > > > > > on the NetConnection.addHeader() method. This useful, public, and > > > documented method of the NetConnection class has not been implemented > > > and is still under discussion within Adobe. So, unless I'm missing > > > something in what you wrote, I don't think it is reasonable to suggest > > > > > PHP developers simply switch to using Web services and Java POJOs. > > > I always understood that something like AS3 would to some degree have > > > to break AS2 and AS1 code and that at some point a new document object > > > > > model might break many APIs. But I do not believe Adobe has to > > > completely break everyone's Flash Remoting applications from end to > > end. > > > I sincerely hope that NetConnection.addHeader reappears in the beta. I > > > > > also hope that if Adobe doesn't do it, someone else will come up with > > > a solid AS3 RecordSet implementation that works flawlessly. I wish I > > > knew for certain if that was even possible. > > > I also think this discussion should give everyone pause. Imagine it is > > > > > 20 months from now. Perhaps, like the ill fated Flash Remoting Gateway > > > > > Servlet MM tried to sell at $999/CPU, the essential parts of Flex Data > > > > > Services will be reverse engineered and available as open source for a > > > > > number of different server-side technologies. Will Adobe once again > > > rewrite everything to make it better and in the process break all its > > > public APIs? Will every Java developer be left wondering if Adobe is > > > just trying to remonetize AMF or if they just don't have the > > > financial/developer resources to retire an API gracefully? > > > In any case, some caution about breaking third party developer's > > > applications from end to end seems appropriate. > > > Yours truly, > > > -Brian > > > > > > Dave Wolf wrote: > > > > > > >I don't understand why you can't simply use <mx:WebService/> to > > > >replace <mx:RemoteObject> in most cases. Using AXIS you can use the > > > >exact same POJO you might have used in a <mx:RemoteObject/> and do so > > > > > >without the need for any gateway. > > > > > > > >- > > > >Dave Wolf > > > >Cynergy Systems, Inc. > > > >Macromedia Flex Alliance Partner > > > >http://www.cynergysystems.com > > > > > > > >Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Office: 866-CYNERGY > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >--- In [email protected], hank williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>As far as I know there is not yet. > > > >> > > > >>There was some discussion about this on the flashcoders list when > > > >>flex2 came out. I made a pretty big deal about the fact that the > > > >>docs seem to indicate that standard remoting will not be something > > > >>that is supported. > > > >> > > > >>Mike Chambers (a MM employee) indicated that it was supported. But > > > >>what he meant was that it was supported at a super low level and you > > > > > >>would essentially have to write all the low level remoting code for > > > >>this. > > > >> > > > >>It seemed pretty clear to me that their intent was to, ahem, > > > >>**encourage** remoting users to buy cold fusion or Flex Data > > > >>Services, in order to do painless remoting, and that they were > > > >>essentially orphaning anyone who was not doing remoting with one of > > > >>their pricey gateways. > > > >> > > > >>Now, perhaps this post will bring adobe employees out of the > > > >>woodwork crying foul and saying I am wrong. But the fact that there > > > >>is any ambiguity about this isssue, is, in and of itself, a real > > problem. > > > >> > > > >>The fact that that there is not some strong statement of continued > > > >>**full** support for traditional remoting is, to me, shameful. > > > >> > > > >>Regards > > > >>Hank > > > >> > > > >>On 12/15/05, Flapflap <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>>Hi there, > > > >>> > > > >>>Because RemoteObject isn't available on Alpha is there a way to > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >use flex > > > > > > > > > > > >>>2 with amf php ? > > > >>> > > > >>>Thanks... > > > >>> > > > >>>By the way : Hello World ! > > > >>> I'm new to this list. > > > >>>-- > > > >>>Flapflap > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>>-- > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > Brian Lesser > > > Assistant Director, Teaching and Technology Support Computing and > > > Communications Services Ryerson University 350 Victoria St. > > > Toronto, Ontario Phone: (416) 979-5000 ext. 6835 > > > M5B 2K3 Fax: (416) 979-5220 > > > Office: AB48D E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > (Enter through LB66) Web: http://www.ryerson.ca/~blesser > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Flexcoders Mailing List > > > FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > > > Search Archives: > > > http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Flexcoders Mailing List > > FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > > Search Archives: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Flexcoders Mailing List > > FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > > Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Flexcoders Mailing List > FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt > Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> AIDS in India: A "lurking bomb." Click and help stop AIDS now. http://us.click.yahoo.com/9QUssC/lzNLAA/TtwFAA/nhFolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
