If limber wins, a simple discussion thread should resolve letter changes to the
name.
-Mark K
-Original Message-
From: Piotr Zarzycki [mailto:piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 4:52 AM
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: [DISCUSS] Name
> For migration : As a customer, I don't think migration is a real option.
I can’t say I agree with that. The business logic is almost seamlessly ported.
The UI is more involved but still pretty similar.
Also, most examples one sees these days are using the Basic component set. I
can
Carlos,
Love your passion and share it fully. I cannot fully agree with you that
having an old application in Flex people will need to rewrite completely.
If they have separated enough good logic - they can put it without to much
effort in our framework. - That is huge advantage in my opinion.
Hi,
I'm with Om and others that one of the results we pursue with this renaming
is to avoid the "Flex" name. We talked about the problems we have today
with clients when "Flex" is put in a discussion. You pay in terms of
credibility to your client.
For migration : As a customer, I don't think
I wanted to throw in a couple words / names to see if they "spark" anything.
Arise
Dawn
Raise / Rise
Dimension
Facet
Morph
Poly
Strand
Derive
Drive
Quest
Journey
Fortune
Prospect
Trend
-Mark K
I actually spilt some coffee on this one. Lol
-Mark K
-Original Message-
From: Erik de Bruin [mailto:e...@ixsoftware.nl]
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 1:26 PM
To: dev@flex.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork
BendForward...
(just kidding!)
EdB
