After compiling the examples, I see that none of the bin-debug builds work,
throwing this error :
TypeError: org.apache.flex.core.Application.base is not a function
file:///C:/p/flex_os/workspace/flexroot/git/flex-asjs/examples/DataGridExample/bin/js-debug/org/apache/flex/core/Application.js
Line
Hi,
Just noticed ActionScript has climbed a few more spots in the Tiobe index and
is now at 17. [1] Was was actually 14 in June! Here's the graph [2]. I
certainly won't claim this is a scientific measurement in any way but is still
interesting to note.
Thanks,
Justin
1.
we have any demo how to configure the FlexJs or FalconJs into the adobe
flash builder 4.6 ?
or any other steps ,blogs related to that ?
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:05 PM, piotrz piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com wrote:
Slightly after time but posted information about release on some polish
forums.
That means your Google Closure Library is out of date. If you are working
from the repos, you probably have a GOOG_HOME environment variable
pointing to and out-of-date version.
On 8/25/14 11:02 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala bigosma...@gmail.com wrote:
After compiling the examples, I see that none of
+1. Didn't realize folks went after the binaries and source page that
often.
On 8/25/14 10:43 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala bigosma...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:11 PM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com
wrote:
Hi,
I was looking at the download menu and the order seems a
Hi,
+1. Didn't realize folks went after the binaries and source page that
often.
Me either was quite surprised - probably means estimates of number of installs
is a lot lower than the actually number. Perhaps people have been going there
when the installer doesn't work?
Thanks,
Justin
Unfortunately, Flash Builder 4.6 is not supported. You will need to use
Flash Builder 4.7, or FDT or possibly IntelliJ.
On 8/25/14 11:23 PM, Patel Amit amitpowerpe...@gmail.com wrote:
we have any demo how to configure the FlexJs or FalconJs into the adobe
flash builder 4.6 ?
or any other steps
Hi,
Published but didn't seem to work - anyone have any ideas?
Thanks,
Justin
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com
wrote:
Hi,
Published but didn't seem to work - anyone have any ideas?
Thanks,
Justin
I do see it here: http://flex.apache.org/download-tourdeflex.html
Maybe you need to clear your cache and try again?
Thanks,
Om
Hi,
Forwarding to dev@ at Om and Alex's request (with a couple of very minor
edits). Please feel free to comment.
Justin
From: Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com
Subject: Reason for the release process
Date: 26 August 2014 12:07:29 pm AEST
To: priv...@flex.apache.org
Hi,
This is
You mean this : http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/flash-builder.html ?
Tom
On 25/08/14 15:11, Patel Amit wrote:
Hi,
Could some share the link for the flash builder 4.7 plugin for the Java
eclipse.?
Amit
__
This email
Oops. I made a bunch of changes to the chart package. I will update the
example soon.
Peter Ent
Adobe Systems
On Aug 26, 2014, at 1:48 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala bigosma...@gmail.com
wrote:
I am getting this error:
build_example.compile:
[echo] Compiling BarChartExample.swf
I pushed changes to BarChartExample that reflect the latest changes to the
SDK. I found one problem which I will look into today: the index.html file
that is generated during the ANT build differs from the index.html
generated by Flash Builder. This difference, which is the coded dimensions
of the
There seems to be two problems. The first is easily solvable: the
build_example.xml has the HTML wrapper size restricted and it could be
changed to 100% x 100%.
The second problem seems more insidious. The SWF just seems blank and I
have to investigate that further. The JS output that is being
Make sure your FlashBuilder set up is on a recent FlexJS install. The
Google Closure Library and Compiler versions changed and generate
different code.
On 8/26/14 7:35 AM, Peter Ent p...@adobe.com wrote:
There seems to be two problems. The first is easily solvable: the
build_example.xml has the
It worked.
It could have been your cache, but Infra also has been fighting a web
server problem where the server doesn't see new pages right away so it
could be that as well.
-Alex
On 8/26/14 12:32 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala bigosma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:28 AM, Justin
I was hoping you'd forward my reply so I don't have to write it again.
Here it is again:
So far, the two other folks on the incubator who replied to my question
there have not supported your position.
They said we could label the website version as a development version or
snapshot (like Maven)
Just happened to notice that ColorPicker's button appears to have been
changed in a way that wouldn't be backward-compatible. Do we care? After
all, it is still experimental.
On 8/26/14 6:17 AM, jmcl...@apache.org jmcl...@apache.org wrote:
Repository: flex-sdk
Updated Branches:
I see it's in experimental, we don't care if the usage changes.
Tom
On 26/08/14 16:59, Alex Harui wrote:
Just happened to notice that ColorPicker's button appears to have been
changed in a way that wouldn't be backward-compatible. Do we care? After
all, it is still experimental.
On
A question came up off-list that made me wonderŠ
I've been an employee pretty much my whole career. Right now I work for
Adobe and everything line of code I write is owned by Adobe, even at home
after hours, even on my own computer, unless I cut a special deal.
Fortunately, I have their blanket
I am not a lawyer, but that said..
On 8/26/2014 12:13 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
My understanding is that when contractors work for a client, the client
generally owns the code.
It depends on the contract, really. But, in my world it is very
uncommon for the client not to claim ownership of
I got my manager to explicitly consent to automatic donations to
Apache when we need to fix things in the SDK. I'm not sure this (i.e.
an email) is enough from a legal standpoint.
On 26 August 2014 17:13, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
A question came up off-list that made me wonderŠ
I've
+1
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com
wrote:
Hi,
+1. Didn't realize folks went after the binaries and source page that
often.
Me either was quite surprised - probably means estimates of number of
installs is a lot lower than the actually number.
+1
On 26 August 2014 17:51, Chris Martin windo...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com
wrote:
Hi,
+1. Didn't realize folks went after the binaries and source page that
often.
Me either was quite surprised - probably means
Additionally, could we remove the prefix Download the? It feels
self-evident, since all the menu items are under the Download Flex
parent item.
On 26 August 2014 17:53, Mihai Chira mihai.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
On 26 August 2014 17:51, Chris Martin windo...@gmail.com wrote:
+1
On Mon,
Hi Mihai,
If you have a manager, that implies that you are an employee. The terms
and conditions of your employment, and the manager's authority level in
the company, factor into whether your contributions are sufficiently
permitted. You may need to go up your management chain and get them to
Does anyone have an idea of which Flex SDK was used for the examples?
Chris
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Chris Martin windo...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks Michael, will do! :D
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 12:44 PM, Mihai Chira mihai.ch...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1
On 23 Aug 2014 04:54, Alex Harui
Thanks Jeffry,
One followup question: My understanding is that a contractor must have
the option of doing non-client work. If that's true, if you found an SDK
bug while working for a client, would you stop the clock, fix the bug,
then start the clock again? That way the fix would be owned by
Hi Mihai,
I didn't want our lack of response to imply to you that, as a new
committer, your thoughts are not welcome. They are, and I suspect most of
us do not have any disagreement with the basic principles of your message.
First, I want to share some information I've learned about Apache.
No objection from me. I usually let something like this sit for 24-48
hours to give a chance for folks in different time zones to respond, then
do it. So feel free to make the changes in a day or two.
-Alex
On 8/26/14 9:55 AM, Mihai Chira mihai.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
Additionally, could we
On 8/26/2014 1:00 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
Thanks Jeffry,
One followup question: My understanding is that a contractor must have
the option of doing non-client work.
As lubricious as it sounds; a lot of contracts I am provided by
employers [bu default] they own everything I do regardless of
Makes sense. Less is more!
EdB
On Tuesday, August 26, 2014, Mihai Chira mihai.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
Additionally, could we remove the prefix Download the? It feels
self-evident, since all the menu items are under the Download Flex
parent item.
On 26 August 2014 17:53, Mihai Chira
Along those lines, I wonder if anybody here knows Chris Gross and might be
able to convince him to donate SourceMate (since it hasn't been updated in
a few years) so that we could integrate it into the Flash Builder plugin.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Patel Amit amitpowerpe...@gmail.com
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:39 PM, Nick Collins ndcoll...@gmail.com wrote:
Along those lines, I wonder if anybody here knows Chris Gross and might be
able to convince him to donate SourceMate (since it hasn't been updated in
a few years) so that we could integrate it into the Flash Builder
I've tried calling him at the element river phone number, emailing him, and
contacting him on LinkedIn before, just to find out what his plans were for
SourceMate, and have yet to ever receive a response. That's why I thought
if someone on this list knew him personally they may get more traction.
In many states ( California may be one of the exceptions ) those kinds of
clauses are completely unenforceable if the invention is developed on
your own time and only on your own equipment. If you are using company
resources, then it definitely murkies the waters, but so long as you steer
clear of
On 8/26/2014 3:56 PM, Nick Collins wrote:
In many states ( California may be one of the exceptions ) those kinds
of clauses are completely unenforceable if the invention is
developed on your own time and only on your own equipment. If you are
using company resources, then it definitely murkies
My understanding is that a contractor must have the option of doing
non-client work. If that's true, if you found an SDK bug while working for a
client, would you stop the clock, fix the bug, then start the clock
again? That way the fix would be owned by you. If the fix is owned by the
HI,
Just happened to notice that ColorPicker's button appears to have been
changed in a way that wouldn't be backward-compatible.
Changing the min width and height by 3 pixels is hardly a huge compatibility
breaker. Plus it's one of the experimental spark components.
Justin
Hi,
They said we could label the website version as a development version or
snapshot (like Maven) does.
I'm really not sure we want to do that (see below).
I don't see any reason to add process where process is not required
It's about community building.
we can save time by not having to
+1 to Justin's proposal. It makes sense to do things the right way and to
encourage new folks to become Release Managers as the overhead is very low
for TourDeFlex project.
Only problem is the required wait time of 72 hours for an RC to be promoted
to production. Can we skip the 72 hours if we
Hi,
My understanding is that when contractors work for a client, the client
generally owns the code.
Depends on what part of the world you are in and the contract you have signed
with your employer or client. It's very different in the US to the rest or the
world.
With most of my contacts I
Hi,
In my experience / opinion; It is quite common for corporate contracts with
non-legally-enforcable clauses.
They certainly sometimes try - even here in Australia. Our employment laws
however makes it quite clear some types of these clauses are not actually
enforceable, in the case of
Sorry in advance for the point-for-point rebuttal, but I couldn't resist...
On 8/26/14 2:46 PM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com wrote:
I don't see any reason to add process where process is not required
It's about community building.
I'm not sure extra process invites community building.
On 8/26/14 2:54 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala bigosma...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to Justin's proposal. It makes sense to do things the right way and to
encourage new folks to become Release Managers as the overhead is very low
for TourDeFlex project.
I don't believe my proposal is the wrong way, just
As a side note, it will make your in-line responses more readable if you
leave an extra line of space between the quote and the response.
Thanks,
Om
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:21 PM, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
Sorry in advance for the point-for-point rebuttal, but I couldn't resist...
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
On 8/26/14 2:54 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala bigosma...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 to Justin's proposal. It makes sense to do things the right way and to
encourage new folks to become Release Managers as the overhead is very low
for
Hi Guys,
ok so I just committed the refactored FlexPMD project (develop branch).
I updated the structure to be more intuitive. Updated to Flexmojos
7.1.0-SNAPSHOT, Apache Flex 4.13.0, Apache FlexUnit 4.2, ...
It was quite a lot of work and a big number of Tests will definitely fail,
cause the
I was not sure how I'd give feedback on this, but I'd have to say Mihai hit
the nail on the head for how I felt too reading these emails.
After reading his email some thoughts came to mind which probably also
parrot a little of what Alex said.
This project is a labor of love. We all are here
Alex,
Thanks for the info on email subjects. Will also keep that in mind (I too
replied to the original thread). Just wanted to drop a note here letting
ya know I caught this one too :)
Chris
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
Hi Mihai,
I didn't want our
On 8/26/14 3:31 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala bigosma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
I don't believe my proposal is the wrong way, just another alternative.
I think your way would lead to confusion. Let's try to avoid that.
What kind of
Hi,
I'm not sure extra process invites community building.
It already has, we've had people report issues during the RC process.
- PMC endorsement
What are the benefits of that. Are you claiming more people will use it
if endorsed?
I would say more people would use an official voted on
Hi,
I would say the line is when we compile a swf with the code in the repo, we
need to make an official release.
+1 to that.
If we are hot linking, i.e. we don't have the source for an example, we
don't need to go through the release
process. Same way as the Installer.
+1 Seems
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
On 8/26/14 3:31 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala bigosma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
I don't believe my proposal is the wrong way, just another alternative.
I think
Hi,
I think it would have been much more rewarding
to the person offering the 3rd party links if we could have hooked him up
yesterday.
I'm not sure that they are currently in a form that can be used in the
application and we would need to change the application to make it clear in the
On 8/26/14 4:04 PM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com wrote:
No, you can't announce / promote nightly build/snapshots [1].
Do not include any links on the project website that might encourage
non-developers to download and use nightly builds, snapshots, release
candidates, or any other
Hi,
I know it seems clear to you, but other incubator folks disagree with you.
Two people suggesting you could possibly release it as snapshop is not exactly
the same thing as disagreeing with me.
If the explorer.xml was not compiled in, flexicious's examples would be
hooked up by now.
Hi,
Agreed, TDF might attract a new pool of developers. We are just
disagreeing on what the best way of attracting them is. I think trying to
attracting them by asking them to do manual testing is not as attractive
as asking them to provide TDF fixes.
1. So manually testing is:
- compiling
On 8/26/14 4:34 PM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com wrote:
Hi,
Agreed, TDF might attract a new pool of developers. We are just
disagreeing on what the best way of attracting them is. I think trying
to
attracting them by asking them to do manual testing is not as attractive
as
I think it means it drops a few ranks, the fluctuation is expectable
though.
On Aug 25, 2014 11:04 PM, Justin Mclean justinmcl...@me.com wrote:
Hi,
Just noticed ActionScript has climbed a few more spots in the Tiobe index
and is now at 17. [1] Was was actually 14 in June! Here's the graph
Hi,
I think it means it drops a few ranks, the fluctuation is expectable though.
A few months back it wasn't in the top 20 and hadn't been for some time.
Thanks,
Justin
Hi,
The rest of the PMC seems to agree with me that Justin has had ample time to
make his
case, and we are not convinced, and therefore it is time to end the
discussion, agree to disagree, and move on.
Given people don't know the context or have access to that list I think it only
fair the
Hi,
I updated the structure to be more intuitive. Updated to Flexmojos
7.1.0-SNAPSHOT, Apache Flex 4.13.0, Apache FlexUnit 4.2, ...
Thanks - hopefully we can get it working.
It was quite a lot of work and a big number of Tests will definitely fail,
I've fixed a few of those and will check in
Hi,
I notice that recent bugs in Adobe bug base on OSMF have been closed with
NotEnoughTime as the reason. Does any one know if Adobe has considered
donating the framework to Apache and f not could we make that happen?
Thanks,
Justin
HI,
Unless I get some support from others, we'll be doing it the way you want.
OK, thanks.
This is also one other subtle issue I've just released. If we don't use the
standard release process, then as per CTR -1 counts as a veto effectually
blocking a release. Do we want to do there?
Don't know anything about OSMF. Would we want it, or would it be a
separate Apache project. Seems like it has its own community already?
I'll try to figure out who is in charge at Adobe.
-Alex
On 8/26/14 7:42 PM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com wrote:
Hi,
I notice that recent bugs in
On 8/26/14 7:56 PM, Justin Mclean jus...@classsoftware.com wrote:
This is also one other subtle issue I've just released. If we don't use
the standard release process, then as per CTR -1 counts as a veto
effectually blocking a release. Do we want to do there?
Well, it blocks that commit, just
Oh I definitely think it's something to have
aYo
www.ayobinitie.com
mrbinitie.blogspot.com
On Aug 27, 2014 5:01 AM, Alex Harui aha...@adobe.com wrote:
Don't know anything about OSMF. Would we want it, or would it be a
separate Apache project. Seems like it has its own community already?
Hi,
Don't really care if it's part of our project or not, but as it's an optional
part of installing the SDK it would be good to have it at Apache.
Justin
Hi,
Keep in mind that we may not be able to do this for 3rd party component
developers. Because we want to hotlink to their examples and code
directly, we may not be able to 'build' a release from our side.
I propose that we create a new thirdparty.xml and allow direct editing of
the file
70 matches
Mail list logo
