Re: StyledLayoutBase - new "waitForSize" public property

[Carlos Rovira]

External UI sets like Spectrum and MDL works ok, but I found when I did MDL
library that we need to build our own set in Royale, since while things
provided natively by MDL worked ok, many times I was without solutions for
many typical use cases like we had in Flex, for that reason I started
Jewel, to try to get best of both worlds. So Jewel tries to give solutions
for typical Flex use cases with dataproviders, item renders, layouts, and
more, and can left other less frequent use cases for external libraries
(for example a scheduler?, or an echart?, or maybe a box diagram?)...but I
think with time will be able to cover even those use cases too.

El jue., 4 jun. 2020 a las 18:11, Harbs () escribió:

> Yes. The most painful point we had when working with Royale was layouts.
>
> FWIW, in Spectrum, I am not using any layout beads at all (or hardly). The
> layout is basically all handled by the Spectrum css.
>
> > On Jun 4, 2020, at 7:05 PM, Carlos Rovira 
> wrote:
> >
> > If you get a better way, that will be a great improvement so far, since I
> > think Royale has still things to solve regarding layouts easeness
> > for user consume.
>
>

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

[Greg Dove]

'I don’t think we’ve dealt with a lot of children changing sizes (other
than Images loading late and a few other things) so it may be time to
listen to widthChanged/heightChanged/sizeChanged as children get added if
there isn’t already code doing that.'

That would be another way of doing it. There is already this code [1] that
is swf-only but seems to only be relevant before sawInitComplete.

But if the children run their layouts when their own size changes, then
they can notify their parent as well if the size changed either before or
during layout. That's sort of what I was trying to do with the
ContainerView change I mentioned earlier. It checks size for change in
beforeLayout and again in afterLayout and then requests parent layout if it
thinks the parent needs to do something that could affect parent layout or
even re-apply its own rules to the current target. In this way there is not
a need to add listeners to every child. But I expect there are some
downsides or things I cannot see with what I did so far because I have not
spent a lot of time in this code, as you have. I'll post more details in
the github issue at my EOD.

1.
https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/blob/9c70b052a6fef3ebe7c6a07ca887af4f7381d46f/frameworks/projects/Core/src/main/royale/org/apache/royale/core/LayoutBase.as#L131

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 3:32 AM Alex Harui  wrote:

> Serkan, is there a bug tracking your layout issue?
>
> There should be a difference between first layout if all children have
> known sizes and what Greg is describing which is responding to children
> changing sizes.  I don’t think we’ve dealt with a lot of children changing
> sizes (other than Images loading late and a few other things) so it may be
> time to listen to widthChanged/heightChanged/sizeChanged as children get
> added if there isn’t already code doing that.
>
> There might be other issues with containers having an inner contentArea
> that might be getting in the way too.
>
> HTH,
> -Alex
>
> From: Yishay Weiss 
> Reply-To: "dev@royale.apache.org" 
> Date: Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 4:30 AM
> To: "dev@royale.apache.org" 
> Subject: RE: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion
>
> Call me lazy but this is a bit difficult to parse. If you can spare some
> time, maybe come up with a GitHub issue that describes a concrete case so
> we can discuss this.
>
> > I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
> don't seem to trigger the parent layout.
>
> Yes, I’ve seen that as well. Alex’s advice when I pointed it out to him
> was to just add a parent.dispatchEvent(new Event(‘layoutNeeded’)) if it
> solves a concrete bug. It’s true that this could result in a performance
> hit. If that’s your issue then I guess we can discuss emulation of the
> layout manager or some other optimization.
>
>
> From: Greg Dove 
> Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:12:08 AM
> To: Apache Royale Development 
> Subject: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion
>
> Hi,
>
> Just wondered if anyone else is dealing with layout issues in Flex
> emulation. I have some layout issues that are slowing my progress on a
> project, and I'd like to resolve them as quickly as I can.
>
> In particular, I see issues with BoxLayout-based containers which have
> percentWidth or percentHeight set. These don't get determined as having
> width or height 'SizedToContent' when performing layout, but in many
> situations they behave in a similar way (they can change their size based
> on their content in terms of layout rules applied by the parent container).
> This is because in Flex, percentages are not simply a percentage of their
> parent, but they follow something perhaps a little closer to flexbox layout
> rules for all the percentWidth or percentHeight siblings (managed by their
> parent's layout). In other words, they are also related to the measured
> size of their content if the parent needs to manage them (I'm not sure how
> best to describe this, but I think that sort of captures it). They can
> expand beyond their percent allocation or contract below it depending on
> their measured sizes.
> I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
> don't seem to trigger the parent layout.
>
> An example might be
> 
>
> If you have the above at the application level (where the application has
> vertical layout) and keep adding buttons (for example) to the HBox via a UI
> test button that adds a new Button to that on each click, then it should
> expand horizontally greater than 50% width when the volume of buttons
> exceeds its nominal 50% width. It is definitely easier to see this if you
> add a border to the container.
>
> I have been working on this, and made progress, but the approach I am using
> feels a bit patchwork, and just wondered whether others are seeing anything
> like this, and/or how it has been addressed elsewhere
>
> Here's a summary of some of the things I have been trying, which do yield
> improvements, but don't 

Re: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

[serkan]

Sure not Alex,

I am creating issues one by one. I just wanted to respond Greg's question.

Thanks,
Serkan

4.06.2020 18:32 tarihinde Alex Harui yazdı:

Serkan, is there a bug tracking your layout issue?

There should be a difference between first layout if all children have known 
sizes and what Greg is describing which is responding to children changing 
sizes.  I don’t think we’ve dealt with a lot of children changing sizes (other 
than Images loading late and a few other things) so it may be time to listen to 
widthChanged/heightChanged/sizeChanged as children get added if there isn’t 
already code doing that.

There might be other issues with containers having an inner contentArea that 
might be getting in the way too.

HTH,
-Alex

From: Yishay Weiss 
Reply-To: "dev@royale.apache.org" 
Date: Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 4:30 AM
To: "dev@royale.apache.org" 
Subject: RE: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

Call me lazy but this is a bit difficult to parse. If you can spare some time, 
maybe come up with a GitHub issue that describes a concrete case so we can 
discuss this.


I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children

don't seem to trigger the parent layout.

Yes, I’ve seen that as well. Alex’s advice when I pointed it out to him was to 
just add a parent.dispatchEvent(new Event(‘layoutNeeded’)) if it solves a 
concrete bug. It’s true that this could result in a performance hit. If that’s 
your issue then I guess we can discuss emulation of the layout manager or some 
other optimization.


From: Greg Dove 
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:12:08 AM
To: Apache Royale Development 
Subject: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

Hi,

Just wondered if anyone else is dealing with layout issues in Flex
emulation. I have some layout issues that are slowing my progress on a
project, and I'd like to resolve them as quickly as I can.

In particular, I see issues with BoxLayout-based containers which have
percentWidth or percentHeight set. These don't get determined as having
width or height 'SizedToContent' when performing layout, but in many
situations they behave in a similar way (they can change their size based
on their content in terms of layout rules applied by the parent container).
This is because in Flex, percentages are not simply a percentage of their
parent, but they follow something perhaps a little closer to flexbox layout
rules for all the percentWidth or percentHeight siblings (managed by their
parent's layout). In other words, they are also related to the measured
size of their content if the parent needs to manage them (I'm not sure how
best to describe this, but I think that sort of captures it). They can
expand beyond their percent allocation or contract below it depending on
their measured sizes.
I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
don't seem to trigger the parent layout.

An example might be


If you have the above at the application level (where the application has
vertical layout) and keep adding buttons (for example) to the HBox via a UI
test button that adds a new Button to that on each click, then it should
expand horizontally greater than 50% width when the volume of buttons
exceeds its nominal 50% width. It is definitely easier to see this if you
add a border to the container.

I have been working on this, and made progress, but the approach I am using
feels a bit patchwork, and just wondered whether others are seeing anything
like this, and/or how it has been addressed elsewhere

Here's a summary of some of the things I have been trying, which do yield
improvements, but don't really solve the problem completely:

1. added extra listener for 'childrenRemoved' in BoxLayout strand setter.

2. Created a new mx 'ContainerView' class
(mx.containers.beads.ContainerView extends
org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView)
This has the following in it:

private var widthBefore:Number = -1
private var heightBefore:Number = -1;
private var sizeChangedBeforeLayout:Boolean;

COMPILE::JS
override public function beforeLayout():Boolean
{
var container:Container = host as Container;

sizeChangedBeforeLayout = (widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore
!= container.height);
widthBefore = container.width;
heightBefore = container.height;
return super.beforeLayout();
}

 COMPILE::JS
 override public function afterLayout():void
 {
 var container:Container = host as Container;
//size might change during layout
var sizeChangedDuringLayout:Boolean = !sizeChangedBeforeLayout &&
(widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore != container.height);
if (sizeChangedDuringLayout) {
//prepare for next time
widthBefore = container.width;
heightBefore = container.height;
}
var requestParentLayout:Boolean = sizeChangedBeforeLayout
|| sizeChangedDuringLayout
   || (!isNaN(container.percentWidth) && container.width <
container.measuredWidth) || (!isNaN(container.percentHeight) &&
container.height < 

Re: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

[Greg Dove]

>
>  Yes, I’ve seen that as well. Alex’s advice when I pointed it out to him
> was to just add a parent.dispatchEvent(new Event(‘layoutNeeded’)) if it
> solves a concrete bug. It’s true that this could result in a performance
> hit. If that’s your issue then I guess we can discuss emulation of the
> layout manager or some other optimization.


I'm not worried about performance issues, or at least I have not had reason
to so far. It was a case of some layouts not working in the way that they
did in Flex, and the need to track them down and figure them out being
complicated in a deeply nested layout structure. Basically the change I
showed in the ContainerView was detecting more cases for when the call to
parent's layout was likely to be needed after the child's layout was
complete.

In terms of thinking about full LayoutManager emulation, I had definitely
wondered about that also. But I think the implications there are important
to consider earlier rather than later, because it might only really make
sense if tied to a general emulation of the Flex component
lifecycle, which we have avoided directly emulating thus far. And so far,
it has worked 'close enough' to get a lot done. So I am not sure what the
threshold for making that decision should be.
Perhaps the question is: are we seeing enough variation in the needs of
people who would consider it is currently 'close enough' for them, for us
to be sure it is 'close enough' for most? If we can be sure of this then we
probably could continue to fill gaps in the current approach (which is
built on/leveraging how things work in Basic and Core etc).


If you can spare some time, maybe come up with a GitHub issue that
> describes a concrete case so we can discuss this.


Sure, I actually started this way, but then figured that I should approach
it with a discussion first, because I have actually worked on this, and
have what I think is at least a partial solution to the problem. I'm just
not sure whether I am tackling it the 'right' way.
I have been testing and refining what I did so far with isolated cases of
the issues, with a simple test app which runs in Flex as well as Royale. I
will post that test app in an issue later today.





On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 11:30 PM Yishay Weiss  wrote:

> Call me lazy but this is a bit difficult to parse. If you can spare some
> time, maybe come up with a GitHub issue that describes a concrete case so
> we can discuss this.
>
>
>
> > I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
> don't seem to trigger the parent layout.
>
>
>
> Yes, I’ve seen that as well. Alex’s advice when I pointed it out to him
> was to just add a parent.dispatchEvent(new Event(‘layoutNeeded’)) if it
> solves a concrete bug. It’s true that this could result in a performance
> hit. If that’s your issue then I guess we can discuss emulation of the
> layout manager or some other optimization.
>
>
>
> *From:* Greg Dove 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:12:08 AM
> *To:* Apache Royale Development 
> *Subject:* MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Just wondered if anyone else is dealing with layout issues in Flex
> emulation. I have some layout issues that are slowing my progress on a
> project, and I'd like to resolve them as quickly as I can.
>
> In particular, I see issues with BoxLayout-based containers which have
> percentWidth or percentHeight set. These don't get determined as having
> width or height 'SizedToContent' when performing layout, but in many
> situations they behave in a similar way (they can change their size based
> on their content in terms of layout rules applied by the parent container).
> This is because in Flex, percentages are not simply a percentage of their
> parent, but they follow something perhaps a little closer to flexbox layout
> rules for all the percentWidth or percentHeight siblings (managed by their
> parent's layout). In other words, they are also related to the measured
> size of their content if the parent needs to manage them (I'm not sure how
> best to describe this, but I think that sort of captures it). They can
> expand beyond their percent allocation or contract below it depending on
> their measured sizes.
> I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
> don't seem to trigger the parent layout.
>
> An example might be
> 
>
> If you have the above at the application level (where the application has
> vertical layout) and keep adding buttons (for example) to the HBox via a UI
> test button that adds a new Button to that on each click, then it should
> expand horizontally greater than 50% width when the volume of buttons
> exceeds its nominal 50% width. It is definitely easier to see this if you
> add a border to the container.
>
> I have been working on this, and made progress, but the approach I am using
> feels a bit patchwork, and just wondered whether others are seeing anything
> like this, and/or how it has been addressed 

Re: StyledLayoutBase - new "waitForSize" public property

[Harbs]

Yes. The most painful point we had when working with Royale was layouts.

FWIW, in Spectrum, I am not using any layout beads at all (or hardly). The 
layout is basically all handled by the Spectrum css.

> On Jun 4, 2020, at 7:05 PM, Carlos Rovira  wrote:
> 
> If you get a better way, that will be a great improvement so far, since I
> think Royale has still things to solve regarding layouts easeness
> for user consume.

Re: StyledLayoutBase - new "waitForSize" public property

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Harbs

please take a look when you have time. I didn't find any other way to deal
with this issue.
For now, if not doing that, you can layout right when using % measures.
Maybe I'm missing something there
If you get a better way, that will be a great improvement so far, since I
think Royale has still things to solve regarding layouts easeness
for user consume.
For now, just let you know I just check for width/height, and if not get
sizing just call requestAnimationFrame until the check is right.

thanks

El jue., 4 jun. 2020 a las 17:10, Harbs () escribió:

> I wonder how this effects performance.
>
> I’d need to look at exactly the flow (which I don’t have time for now),
> but one thing to keep in mind is that if reads and writes are not carefully
> plan, it could cause forced layouts which is a performance killer.
>
> Not sure if this effects what you did or not, but definitely something to
> keep in mind.
>
> HTH,
> Harbs
>
> > On Jun 4, 2020, at 5:49 PM, Carlos Rovira 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > as part of the Jewel Tile Layout improvement, I want to let you know
> about
> > an important addition.
> >
> > until now I had very hard time dealing with width/height of a component
> in
> > layout classes when the width or height are a percentage
> > or not set.
> >
> > Since that depends on other containers, I found while working on Jewel
> > DataGrid that I need to make "requestAnimationFrame" calls
> > until I get the proper measurements.
> >
> > So I set up a "waitForSize" public property that is available in all
> Jewel
> > layouts, since all comes from StyledLayoutBase.
> > This is false by default, so you need to put to true to use this
> feature. I
> > didn't other way to get this measures, I think maybe this could have
> > some performance hit, for that reason, I let users choose. If you know
> > something better, let me know :)
> >
> > If you check that code you'll find that performanceLayout is now using
> > "checkHostSize()" (if waitForSize is true).The code is this:
> >
> > /**
> > * We call requestAnimationFrame until we get width and height
> > */
> > COMPILE::JS
> > protected function checkHostSize():void {
> > if(sizeInitialized) return;
> > if((host.width == 0 && !isNaN(host.percentWidth)) ||
> > (host.height == 0 && !isNaN(host.percentHeight)))
> > {
> > requestAnimationFrame(checkHostSize);
> > } else
> > {
> > sizeInitialized = true;
> > executeLayout();
> > }
> > }
> >
> > when we get the size, we continue as usual.
> > As I said before if you left "waitForSize" to false (default), it will
> work
> > as always.
> >
> > For example, new tile horizontal layout is using it in TDJ:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
> > Any comment are welcome
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

[Alex Harui]

Serkan, is there a bug tracking your layout issue?

There should be a difference between first layout if all children have known 
sizes and what Greg is describing which is responding to children changing 
sizes.  I don’t think we’ve dealt with a lot of children changing sizes (other 
than Images loading late and a few other things) so it may be time to listen to 
widthChanged/heightChanged/sizeChanged as children get added if there isn’t 
already code doing that.

There might be other issues with containers having an inner contentArea that 
might be getting in the way too.

HTH,
-Alex

From: Yishay Weiss 
Reply-To: "dev@royale.apache.org" 
Date: Thursday, June 4, 2020 at 4:30 AM
To: "dev@royale.apache.org" 
Subject: RE: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

Call me lazy but this is a bit difficult to parse. If you can spare some time, 
maybe come up with a GitHub issue that describes a concrete case so we can 
discuss this.

> I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
don't seem to trigger the parent layout.

Yes, I’ve seen that as well. Alex’s advice when I pointed it out to him was to 
just add a parent.dispatchEvent(new Event(‘layoutNeeded’)) if it solves a 
concrete bug. It’s true that this could result in a performance hit. If that’s 
your issue then I guess we can discuss emulation of the layout manager or some 
other optimization.


From: Greg Dove 
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:12:08 AM
To: Apache Royale Development 
Subject: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

Hi,

Just wondered if anyone else is dealing with layout issues in Flex
emulation. I have some layout issues that are slowing my progress on a
project, and I'd like to resolve them as quickly as I can.

In particular, I see issues with BoxLayout-based containers which have
percentWidth or percentHeight set. These don't get determined as having
width or height 'SizedToContent' when performing layout, but in many
situations they behave in a similar way (they can change their size based
on their content in terms of layout rules applied by the parent container).
This is because in Flex, percentages are not simply a percentage of their
parent, but they follow something perhaps a little closer to flexbox layout
rules for all the percentWidth or percentHeight siblings (managed by their
parent's layout). In other words, they are also related to the measured
size of their content if the parent needs to manage them (I'm not sure how
best to describe this, but I think that sort of captures it). They can
expand beyond their percent allocation or contract below it depending on
their measured sizes.
I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
don't seem to trigger the parent layout.

An example might be


If you have the above at the application level (where the application has
vertical layout) and keep adding buttons (for example) to the HBox via a UI
test button that adds a new Button to that on each click, then it should
expand horizontally greater than 50% width when the volume of buttons
exceeds its nominal 50% width. It is definitely easier to see this if you
add a border to the container.

I have been working on this, and made progress, but the approach I am using
feels a bit patchwork, and just wondered whether others are seeing anything
like this, and/or how it has been addressed elsewhere

Here's a summary of some of the things I have been trying, which do yield
improvements, but don't really solve the problem completely:

1. added extra listener for 'childrenRemoved' in BoxLayout strand setter.

2. Created a new mx 'ContainerView' class
(mx.containers.beads.ContainerView extends
org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView)
This has the following in it:

private var widthBefore:Number = -1
private var heightBefore:Number = -1;
private var sizeChangedBeforeLayout:Boolean;

COMPILE::JS
override public function beforeLayout():Boolean
{
var container:Container = host as Container;

sizeChangedBeforeLayout = (widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore
!= container.height);
widthBefore = container.width;
heightBefore = container.height;
return super.beforeLayout();
}

COMPILE::JS
override public function afterLayout():void
{
var container:Container = host as Container;
//size might change during layout
var sizeChangedDuringLayout:Boolean = !sizeChangedBeforeLayout &&
(widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore != container.height);
if (sizeChangedDuringLayout) {
//prepare for next time
widthBefore = container.width;
heightBefore = container.height;
}
var requestParentLayout:Boolean = sizeChangedBeforeLayout
|| sizeChangedDuringLayout
  || (!isNaN(container.percentWidth) && container.width <
container.measuredWidth) || (!isNaN(container.percentHeight) &&
container.height < container.measuredHeight);
if (requestParentLayout && container.parent is Container) {
trace('requesting parent layout of ',(container as

Re: StyledLayoutBase - new "waitForSize" public property

[Harbs]

I wonder how this effects performance.

I’d need to look at exactly the flow (which I don’t have time for now), but one 
thing to keep in mind is that if reads and writes are not carefully plan, it 
could cause forced layouts which is a performance killer.

Not sure if this effects what you did or not, but definitely something to keep 
in mind.

HTH,
Harbs

> On Jun 4, 2020, at 5:49 PM, Carlos Rovira  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> as part of the Jewel Tile Layout improvement, I want to let you know about
> an important addition.
> 
> until now I had very hard time dealing with width/height of a component in
> layout classes when the width or height are a percentage
> or not set.
> 
> Since that depends on other containers, I found while working on Jewel
> DataGrid that I need to make "requestAnimationFrame" calls
> until I get the proper measurements.
> 
> So I set up a "waitForSize" public property that is available in all Jewel
> layouts, since all comes from StyledLayoutBase.
> This is false by default, so you need to put to true to use this feature. I
> didn't other way to get this measures, I think maybe this could have
> some performance hit, for that reason, I let users choose. If you know
> something better, let me know :)
> 
> If you check that code you'll find that performanceLayout is now using
> "checkHostSize()" (if waitForSize is true).The code is this:
> 
> /**
> * We call requestAnimationFrame until we get width and height
> */
> COMPILE::JS
> protected function checkHostSize():void {
> if(sizeInitialized) return;
> if((host.width == 0 && !isNaN(host.percentWidth)) ||
> (host.height == 0 && !isNaN(host.percentHeight)))
> {
> requestAnimationFrame(checkHostSize);
> } else
> {
> sizeInitialized = true;
> executeLayout();
> }
> }
> 
> when we get the size, we continue as usual.
> As I said before if you left "waitForSize" to false (default), it will work
> as always.
> 
> For example, new tile horizontal layout is using it in TDJ:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any comment are welcome
> 
> Thanks
> 
> -- 
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira

StyledLayoutBase - new "waitForSize" public property

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi,

as part of the Jewel Tile Layout improvement, I want to let you know about
an important addition.

until now I had very hard time dealing with width/height of a component in
layout classes when the width or height are a percentage
or not set.

Since that depends on other containers, I found while working on Jewel
DataGrid that I need to make "requestAnimationFrame" calls
until I get the proper measurements.

So I set up a "waitForSize" public property that is available in all Jewel
layouts, since all comes from StyledLayoutBase.
This is false by default, so you need to put to true to use this feature. I
didn't other way to get this measures, I think maybe this could have
some performance hit, for that reason, I let users choose. If you know
something better, let me know :)

If you check that code you'll find that performanceLayout is now using
"checkHostSize()" (if waitForSize is true).The code is this:

/**
* We call requestAnimationFrame until we get width and height
*/
COMPILE::JS
protected function checkHostSize():void {
if(sizeInitialized) return;
if((host.width == 0 && !isNaN(host.percentWidth)) ||
(host.height == 0 && !isNaN(host.percentHeight)))
{
requestAnimationFrame(checkHostSize);
} else
{
sizeInitialized = true;
executeLayout();
}
}

when we get the size, we continue as usual.
As I said before if you left "waitForSize" to false (default), it will work
as always.

For example, new tile horizontal layout is using it in TDJ:






Any comment are welcome

Thanks

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Harbs]

Cool. Thanks!

> On Jun 4, 2020, at 5:26 PM, Carlos Rovira  wrote:
> 
> Hi Harbs,
> 
> as I mentioned earlier this thread, I already fixed it, just is still not
> in production, I did it on pre site, will be published soon :)
> 
> El jue., 4 jun. 2020 a las 13:30, Harbs () escribió:
> 
>> I just checked.
>> 
>> The thanks page[1] correctly has nofollow links but the support page[2]
>> has "noopener noreferrer” links.
>> 
>> That is not correct.
>> 
>> Carlos, please fix them to be “nofollow".
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Harbs
>> 
>> [1]https://royale.apache.org/thanks-to/
>> [2]https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/ <
>> https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/>
>> 
>>> On Jun 4, 2020, at 2:00 PM, Harbs  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Yeah. AFAIK, they already are. If there’s a link without a nofollow,
>> it’s a bug.
>>> 
 On Jun 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, Christofer Dutz > > wrote:
 
 and also you should make all links nofollow links.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Harbs,

as I mentioned earlier this thread, I already fixed it, just is still not
in production, I did it on pre site, will be published soon :)

El jue., 4 jun. 2020 a las 13:30, Harbs () escribió:

> I just checked.
>
> The thanks page[1] correctly has nofollow links but the support page[2]
> has "noopener noreferrer” links.
>
> That is not correct.
>
> Carlos, please fix them to be “nofollow".
>
> Thanks,
> Harbs
>
> [1]https://royale.apache.org/thanks-to/
> [2]https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/ <
> https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/>
>
> > On Jun 4, 2020, at 2:00 PM, Harbs  wrote:
> >
> > Yeah. AFAIK, they already are. If there’s a link without a nofollow,
> it’s a bug.
> >
> >> On Jun 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, Christofer Dutz  > wrote:
> >>
> >> and also you should make all links nofollow links.
> >
>
>

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Harbs]

Nope. Missing the nofollow was a good catch. It needs to be fixed. Thanks. :-)

> On Jun 4, 2020, at 3:07 PM, Christofer Dutz  wrote:
> 
> I hope this wasn't perceived as nitpicking from my side

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi all,

I hope this wasn't perceived as nitpicking from my side ... I like that page 
and would like to adopt it similarly for PLC4X.

And the only reason I posted the code was that you said: If it's not that way, 
it's a bug ... so I checked and it wasn't so just consider that a bug report.

I could imagine that if you use WP for the website, you might lose some 
flexibility regarding how stuff is rendered. 
So I would assume that's why. But it's all just a wild guess ;-)

Chris


Am 04.06.20, 13:39 schrieb "Harbs" :

I think you missed my later email where I agreed with you. “noopener 
noreferrer” is wrong.

Not sure how it got messed up on that page. When we discussed it 2 years 
ago I thought we all understood that it needs to be nofollow like it is on the 
"thanks” page.

Thanks,
Harbs

> On Jun 4, 2020, at 2:35 PM, Christofer Dutz  
wrote:
> 
> Hi Harbs,
> 
> they are all like this:
> Bowler Hat LLC
> 
> So no nofollow.
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> 
> Am 04.06.20, 13:00 schrieb "Harbs" :
> 
>Yeah. AFAIK, they already are. If there’s a link without a nofollow, 
it’s a bug.
> 
>> On Jun 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, Christofer Dutz  
wrote:
>> 
>> and also you should make all links nofollow links.
> 
> 

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Harbs]

I think you missed my later email where I agreed with you. “noopener 
noreferrer” is wrong.

Not sure how it got messed up on that page. When we discussed it 2 years ago I 
thought we all understood that it needs to be nofollow like it is on the 
"thanks” page.

Thanks,
Harbs

> On Jun 4, 2020, at 2:35 PM, Christofer Dutz  wrote:
> 
> Hi Harbs,
> 
> they are all like this:
> Bowler 
> Hat LLC
> 
> So no nofollow.
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> 
> Am 04.06.20, 13:00 schrieb "Harbs" :
> 
>Yeah. AFAIK, they already are. If there’s a link without a nofollow, it’s 
> a bug.
> 
>> On Jun 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, Christofer Dutz  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> and also you should make all links nofollow links.
> 
> 

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi Harbs,

they are all like this:
Bowler Hat 
LLC

So no nofollow.

Chris



Am 04.06.20, 13:00 schrieb "Harbs" :

Yeah. AFAIK, they already are. If there’s a link without a nofollow, it’s a 
bug.

> On Jun 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, Christofer Dutz  
wrote:
> 
> and also you should make all links nofollow links.

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi all,

the discussion I was talking about was multiple casual discussions on our PLC4X 
slack channel.

The link I was referring to was this one:
https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/linking


Chris



Am 04.06.20, 13:30 schrieb "Harbs" :

I just checked.

The thanks page[1] correctly has nofollow links but the support page[2] has 
"noopener noreferrer” links.

That is not correct.

Carlos, please fix them to be “nofollow".

Thanks,
Harbs

[1]https://royale.apache.org/thanks-to/
[2]https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/ 


> On Jun 4, 2020, at 2:00 PM, Harbs  wrote:
> 
> Yeah. AFAIK, they already are. If there’s a link without a nofollow, it’s 
a bug.
> 
>> On Jun 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, Christofer Dutz mailto:christofer.d...@c-ware.de>> wrote:
>> 
>> and also you should make all links nofollow links.
> 

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Harbs]

I just checked.

The thanks page[1] correctly has nofollow links but the support page[2] has 
"noopener noreferrer” links.

That is not correct.

Carlos, please fix them to be “nofollow".

Thanks,
Harbs

[1]https://royale.apache.org/thanks-to/
[2]https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/ 


> On Jun 4, 2020, at 2:00 PM, Harbs  wrote:
> 
> Yeah. AFAIK, they already are. If there’s a link without a nofollow, it’s a 
> bug.
> 
>> On Jun 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, Christofer Dutz > > wrote:
>> 
>> and also you should make all links nofollow links.
> 

RE: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

[Yishay Weiss]

Call me lazy but this is a bit difficult to parse. If you can spare some time, 
maybe come up with a GitHub issue that describes a concrete case so we can 
discuss this.

> I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
don't seem to trigger the parent layout.

Yes, I’ve seen that as well. Alex’s advice when I pointed it out to him was to 
just add a parent.dispatchEvent(new Event(‘layoutNeeded’)) if it solves a 
concrete bug. It’s true that this could result in a performance hit. If that’s 
your issue then I guess we can discuss emulation of the layout manager or some 
other optimization.


From: Greg Dove 
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:12:08 AM
To: Apache Royale Development 
Subject: MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

Hi,

Just wondered if anyone else is dealing with layout issues in Flex
emulation. I have some layout issues that are slowing my progress on a
project, and I'd like to resolve them as quickly as I can.

In particular, I see issues with BoxLayout-based containers which have
percentWidth or percentHeight set. These don't get determined as having
width or height 'SizedToContent' when performing layout, but in many
situations they behave in a similar way (they can change their size based
on their content in terms of layout rules applied by the parent container).
This is because in Flex, percentages are not simply a percentage of their
parent, but they follow something perhaps a little closer to flexbox layout
rules for all the percentWidth or percentHeight siblings (managed by their
parent's layout). In other words, they are also related to the measured
size of their content if the parent needs to manage them (I'm not sure how
best to describe this, but I think that sort of captures it). They can
expand beyond their percent allocation or contract below it depending on
their measured sizes.
I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
don't seem to trigger the parent layout.

An example might be


If you have the above at the application level (where the application has
vertical layout) and keep adding buttons (for example) to the HBox via a UI
test button that adds a new Button to that on each click, then it should
expand horizontally greater than 50% width when the volume of buttons
exceeds its nominal 50% width. It is definitely easier to see this if you
add a border to the container.

I have been working on this, and made progress, but the approach I am using
feels a bit patchwork, and just wondered whether others are seeing anything
like this, and/or how it has been addressed elsewhere

Here's a summary of some of the things I have been trying, which do yield
improvements, but don't really solve the problem completely:

1. added extra listener for 'childrenRemoved' in BoxLayout strand setter.

2. Created a new mx 'ContainerView' class
(mx.containers.beads.ContainerView extends
org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView)
This has the following in it:

private var widthBefore:Number = -1
private var heightBefore:Number = -1;
private var sizeChangedBeforeLayout:Boolean;

COMPILE::JS
override public function beforeLayout():Boolean
{
var container:Container = host as Container;

sizeChangedBeforeLayout = (widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore
!= container.height);
widthBefore = container.width;
heightBefore = container.height;
return super.beforeLayout();
}

COMPILE::JS
override public function afterLayout():void
{
var container:Container = host as Container;
//size might change during layout
var sizeChangedDuringLayout:Boolean = !sizeChangedBeforeLayout &&
(widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore != container.height);
if (sizeChangedDuringLayout) {
//prepare for next time
widthBefore = container.width;
heightBefore = container.height;
}
var requestParentLayout:Boolean = sizeChangedBeforeLayout
|| sizeChangedDuringLayout
  || (!isNaN(container.percentWidth) && container.width <
container.measuredWidth) || (!isNaN(container.percentHeight) &&
container.height < container.measuredHeight);
if (requestParentLayout && container.parent is Container) {
trace('requesting parent layout of ',(container as
Object).ROYALE_CLASS_INFO.names[0].qName );
(container.parent as Container).layoutNeeded();
}
}

That is pretty much it, and it is being used as a replacement in my local
MXRoyale css for Container:

 /*IBeadView:
ClassReference("org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView");*/
IBeadView: ClassReference("mx.containers.beads.ContainerView");

I'm not saying this is right, but it does help quite a bit with what I am
facing.

In addition to BoxLayout in general, I have been working on the
Grid/GridRow/GridItem layouts which are more specific in terms of layout
changes needed, but also can have similar problems.


Although I am seeing improvements with what I have done so far, I'm not
really satisfied with it, and I am keen for input/discussion (or
collaboration). I 

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Harbs]

> On Jun 4, 2020, at 2:08 PM, Piotr Zarzycki  wrote:
> 
> Anyone remember discussion where we asked about it?

It was April 2018.

> 
> No follow - it means that even email cannot open in a default email
> software? :)

No. email link is fine. nofollow is instructions to search engines to not 
calculate the link for search prioritization. (i.e. Apache does not want to 
“sponsor” companies to improve their search results.)

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Chris,

Your doubts related to that page are based on discussion with someone or
some document? Please share - especially those related to no follow links.

If I remember correctly we have asked somewhere about that page when it was
created. You can search the archive if you are concerned about it.

Anyone remember discussion where we asked about it?

No follow - it means that even email cannot open in a default email
software? :)

Thanks for input,
Piotr

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 12:31 PM Christofer Dutz 
wrote:

> Well we were having doubts.
>
> It seems that Apache sort of tolerates these pages (All links should be
> "nofollow" ... I think you should perhaps adjust your page a bit regarding
> this)
> Guess the problem is that commercial-support is "commercial" and Apache is
> a non-profit organization. We would be allowed to do that, but it's the
> requirement that all requests are handled equally and project involvement
> has no impact on if you will be listed or not.
> So we would need to vote and establish a process that would be equal for
> everyone, even the PMCs.
> Therefore we started with accepting applications as PRs via Github (This
> way we have some responsibility on file) even the ones from project members
> and don't merg our own changes.
>
> We didn't do it so-far as we know there are some companies just using
> PLC4X and wanting to promote their "industrialness" by being listed there.
> But what you folks did, with listing the project involvement, might be a
> way to go.
>
> So if some stranger would come and say "List me" he'll just show up with
> empty involvement. So I like that idea.
>
> Chris
>
> PS: I would suggest you formally vote on a process of listing people (even
> if it's just "we'll add anyone") and also you should make all links
> nofollow links.
>
>
>
> Am 04.06.20, 12:01 schrieb "Andrew Wetmore" :
>
> If we were getting thousands of requests to be listed, setting up a
> voting
> structure might make sense. At the moment, however, it would be more
> structure than we need.
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 4:08 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > We didn't have any vote if someone wanted to be added. I think our
> project
> > is bad example to think in a way of voting. It would be very
> individual. We
> > knew all people who wanted to be on that page, we didn't expect that
> there
> > will be someone from totally outside specialized in migration to
> Royale,
> > someone who is silent on that list.
> >
> > Just look into your project and find the answer there - do you think
> you
> > will have request to adding to your page from someone who you do not
> know
> > from the list ? - If the answer is NO - you probably don't need vote.
> >
> > What's more in my opinion I would be against vote anyway whoever
> would like
> > to be on such page in case of Royale.
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:59 AM Christofer Dutz <
> christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Piotr,
> > >
> > > I was more asking if there is any vote on this ... or is anyone
> added
> > > without checks or discussion?
> > > I'm not asking cause I want to be added ... I'm asking cause I
> would be
> > > interested on how you folks decided to do this.
> > > As I mentioned, we want to implement something similar for PLC4X.
> > >
> > > And I would be interested in hearing what you're experience with
> this is
> > > in general.
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > > Am 04.06.20, 08:39 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
> > >:
> > >
> > > Hi Chris,
> > >
> > > I'm not entirely sure what do you ask. However in case of
> adding
> > > entries
> > > you need to take on the list as I asked for a change. Our
> website is
> > > unfortunately based on WordPress so someone has to add that.
> Carlos
> > is
> > > pretty quick with that, so I asked him.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Piotr
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:18 AM Christofer Dutz <
> > > christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sending this again as my last one didn't seem to make it
> through
> > ...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi folks,
> > > >
> > > > glad you brought this up .. I didn't know there was this page
> > (Found
> > > it
> > > > quite hard to reach)
> > > > We were discussing doing something similar in PLC4X.
> > > >
> > > > We currently decided to add an "adopters" page ... perhaps
> it would
> > > be a
> > > > good idea to add a royale logo above the table as you're
> having the
> > > same
> > > > "problem" we're currently having with our list ... if
> someone posts
> > > a link
> > > > to that page, most chat tools expand this 

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Harbs]

Yeah. AFAIK, they already are. If there’s a link without a nofollow, it’s a bug.

> On Jun 4, 2020, at 1:31 PM, Christofer Dutz  wrote:
> 
> and also you should make all links nofollow links.

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Christofer Dutz]

Well we were having doubts.

It seems that Apache sort of tolerates these pages (All links should be 
"nofollow" ... I think you should perhaps adjust your page a bit regarding this)
Guess the problem is that commercial-support is "commercial" and Apache is a 
non-profit organization. We would be allowed to do that, but it's the 
requirement that all requests are handled equally and project involvement has 
no impact on if you will be listed or not. 
So we would need to vote and establish a process that would be equal for 
everyone, even the PMCs.
Therefore we started with accepting applications as PRs via Github (This way we 
have some responsibility on file) even the ones from project members and don't 
merg our own changes. 

We didn't do it so-far as we know there are some companies just using PLC4X and 
wanting to promote their "industrialness" by being listed there.
But what you folks did, with listing the project involvement, might be a way to 
go. 

So if some stranger would come and say "List me" he'll just show up with empty 
involvement. So I like that idea.

Chris

PS: I would suggest you formally vote on a process of listing people (even if 
it's just "we'll add anyone") and also you should make all links nofollow links.



Am 04.06.20, 12:01 schrieb "Andrew Wetmore" :

If we were getting thousands of requests to be listed, setting up a voting
structure might make sense. At the moment, however, it would be more
structure than we need.

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 4:08 AM Piotr Zarzycki 
wrote:

> We didn't have any vote if someone wanted to be added. I think our project
> is bad example to think in a way of voting. It would be very individual. 
We
> knew all people who wanted to be on that page, we didn't expect that there
> will be someone from totally outside specialized in migration to Royale,
> someone who is silent on that list.
>
> Just look into your project and find the answer there - do you think you
> will have request to adding to your page from someone who you do not know
> from the list ? - If the answer is NO - you probably don't need vote.
>
> What's more in my opinion I would be against vote anyway whoever would 
like
> to be on such page in case of Royale.
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:59 AM Christofer Dutz 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Piotr,
> >
> > I was more asking if there is any vote on this ... or is anyone added
> > without checks or discussion?
> > I'm not asking cause I want to be added ... I'm asking cause I would be
> > interested on how you folks decided to do this.
> > As I mentioned, we want to implement something similar for PLC4X.
> >
> > And I would be interested in hearing what you're experience with this is
> > in general.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > Am 04.06.20, 08:39 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki"  >:
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > I'm not entirely sure what do you ask. However in case of adding
> > entries
> > you need to take on the list as I asked for a change. Our website is
> > unfortunately based on WordPress so someone has to add that. Carlos
> is
> > pretty quick with that, so I asked him.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Piotr
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:18 AM Christofer Dutz <
> > christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sending this again as my last one didn't seem to make it through
> ...
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > glad you brought this up .. I didn't know there was this page
> (Found
> > it
> > > quite hard to reach)
> > > We were discussing doing something similar in PLC4X.
> > >
> > > We currently decided to add an "adopters" page ... perhaps it 
would
> > be a
> > > good idea to add a royale logo above the table as you're having 
the
> > same
> > > "problem" we're currently having with our list ... if someone 
posts
> > a link
> > > to that page, most chat tools expand this to the first logo, which
> > is the
> > > "Bowler Hat" logo ...
> > >
> > > How is the experience with this? Are there many requests coming 
in?
> > We
> > > were a little hesitant in PLC4X.
> > > What's the process on adding entries? Do I just send an email and
> > that's
> > > added or is there any PMC voting going on?
> > > Just asking cause we're interested in doing something similar.
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Am 03.06.20, 19:23 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > Hi Carlos,
> > >
> > > Would you be able to change commercial support page in
> following
> > way.
> > >
> > > 1) In 

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Andrew Wetmore]

If we were getting thousands of requests to be listed, setting up a voting
structure might make sense. At the moment, however, it would be more
structure than we need.

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 4:08 AM Piotr Zarzycki 
wrote:

> We didn't have any vote if someone wanted to be added. I think our project
> is bad example to think in a way of voting. It would be very individual. We
> knew all people who wanted to be on that page, we didn't expect that there
> will be someone from totally outside specialized in migration to Royale,
> someone who is silent on that list.
>
> Just look into your project and find the answer there - do you think you
> will have request to adding to your page from someone who you do not know
> from the list ? - If the answer is NO - you probably don't need vote.
>
> What's more in my opinion I would be against vote anyway whoever would like
> to be on such page in case of Royale.
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:59 AM Christofer Dutz 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Piotr,
> >
> > I was more asking if there is any vote on this ... or is anyone added
> > without checks or discussion?
> > I'm not asking cause I want to be added ... I'm asking cause I would be
> > interested on how you folks decided to do this.
> > As I mentioned, we want to implement something similar for PLC4X.
> >
> > And I would be interested in hearing what you're experience with this is
> > in general.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > Am 04.06.20, 08:39 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki"  >:
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> >
> > I'm not entirely sure what do you ask. However in case of adding
> > entries
> > you need to take on the list as I asked for a change. Our website is
> > unfortunately based on WordPress so someone has to add that. Carlos
> is
> > pretty quick with that, so I asked him.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Piotr
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:18 AM Christofer Dutz <
> > christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Sending this again as my last one didn't seem to make it through
> ...
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > glad you brought this up .. I didn't know there was this page
> (Found
> > it
> > > quite hard to reach)
> > > We were discussing doing something similar in PLC4X.
> > >
> > > We currently decided to add an "adopters" page ... perhaps it would
> > be a
> > > good idea to add a royale logo above the table as you're having the
> > same
> > > "problem" we're currently having with our list ... if someone posts
> > a link
> > > to that page, most chat tools expand this to the first logo, which
> > is the
> > > "Bowler Hat" logo ...
> > >
> > > How is the experience with this? Are there many requests coming in?
> > We
> > > were a little hesitant in PLC4X.
> > > What's the process on adding entries? Do I just send an email and
> > that's
> > > added or is there any PMC voting going on?
> > > Just asking cause we're interested in doing something similar.
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Am 03.06.20, 19:23 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > Hi Carlos,
> > >
> > > Would you be able to change commercial support page in
> following
> > way.
> > >
> > > 1) In section "Name" add under Prominic.NET in the second line
> > > Moonshine
> > > IDE link https://moonshine-ide.com/
> > > 2) In section "Contact Email" change to
> sa...@moonshine-ide.com
> > > 3) Short Description: Could you make as a link following
> sentence
> > > "porting
> > > Apache Flex applications to Apache Royale" ->
> > > https://moonshine-ide.com/flex-migration/
> > >
> > > Would it be possible to make all of those changes ?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Piotr
> > >
> > > czw., 8 sie 2019 o 10:48 Carlos Rovira <
> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > > napisał(a):
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > BowlerHat / Josh Tynjala entry was added to the list too :)
> > > >
> > > > Best
> > > >
> > > > Carlos
> > > >
> > > > El mié., 7 ago. 2019 a las 21:43, Andrew Wetmore (<
> > > cottag...@gmail.com>)
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > > > That looks very good, with the list of providers above the
> > > qualifications
> > > > > for getting added to the list.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 2:18 PM Yishay Weiss <
> > > yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Good to hear Carlos, thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > From: Carlos Rovira 
> > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:57:58 PM
> > > > > > To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Royale Commercial 

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Exactly it should be still part of prominic entry. You will see:

Prominic.NET
Moonshine IDE

czw., 4 cze 2020 o 10:15 Carlos Rovira  napisał(a):

> Hi Piotr,
>
> do you want to let the actual Prominic.NET info and add the new one below,
> but as part of Prominic.NET. Right?
>


-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
*

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Piotr,

do you want to let the actual Prominic.NET info and add the new one below,
but as part of Prominic.NET. Right?

MXRoyale layout issues - questions/discussion

[Greg Dove]

Hi,

Just wondered if anyone else is dealing with layout issues in Flex
emulation. I have some layout issues that are slowing my progress on a
project, and I'd like to resolve them as quickly as I can.

In particular, I see issues with BoxLayout-based containers which have
percentWidth or percentHeight set. These don't get determined as having
width or height 'SizedToContent' when performing layout, but in many
situations they behave in a similar way (they can change their size based
on their content in terms of layout rules applied by the parent container).
This is because in Flex, percentages are not simply a percentage of their
parent, but they follow something perhaps a little closer to flexbox layout
rules for all the percentWidth or percentHeight siblings (managed by their
parent's layout). In other words, they are also related to the measured
size of their content if the parent needs to manage them (I'm not sure how
best to describe this, but I think that sort of captures it). They can
expand beyond their percent allocation or contract below it depending on
their measured sizes.
I think the layouts work downward for this, but changes in the children
don't seem to trigger the parent layout.

An example might be


If you have the above at the application level (where the application has
vertical layout) and keep adding buttons (for example) to the HBox via a UI
test button that adds a new Button to that on each click, then it should
expand horizontally greater than 50% width when the volume of buttons
exceeds its nominal 50% width. It is definitely easier to see this if you
add a border to the container.

I have been working on this, and made progress, but the approach I am using
feels a bit patchwork, and just wondered whether others are seeing anything
like this, and/or how it has been addressed elsewhere

Here's a summary of some of the things I have been trying, which do yield
improvements, but don't really solve the problem completely:

1. added extra listener for 'childrenRemoved' in BoxLayout strand setter.

2. Created a new mx 'ContainerView' class
(mx.containers.beads.ContainerView extends
org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView)
This has the following in it:

private var widthBefore:Number = -1
private var heightBefore:Number = -1;
private var sizeChangedBeforeLayout:Boolean;

COMPILE::JS
override public function beforeLayout():Boolean
{
var container:Container = host as Container;

sizeChangedBeforeLayout = (widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore
!= container.height);
widthBefore = container.width;
heightBefore = container.height;
return super.beforeLayout();
}

COMPILE::JS
override public function afterLayout():void
{
var container:Container = host as Container;
//size might change during layout
var sizeChangedDuringLayout:Boolean = !sizeChangedBeforeLayout &&
(widthBefore != container.width || heightBefore != container.height);
if (sizeChangedDuringLayout) {
//prepare for next time
widthBefore = container.width;
heightBefore = container.height;
}
var requestParentLayout:Boolean = sizeChangedBeforeLayout
|| sizeChangedDuringLayout
  || (!isNaN(container.percentWidth) && container.width <
container.measuredWidth) || (!isNaN(container.percentHeight) &&
container.height < container.measuredHeight);
if (requestParentLayout && container.parent is Container) {
trace('requesting parent layout of ',(container as
Object).ROYALE_CLASS_INFO.names[0].qName );
(container.parent as Container).layoutNeeded();
}
}

That is pretty much it, and it is being used as a replacement in my local
MXRoyale css for Container:

 /*IBeadView:
ClassReference("org.apache.royale.html.beads.ContainerView");*/
IBeadView: ClassReference("mx.containers.beads.ContainerView");

I'm not saying this is right, but it does help quite a bit with what I am
facing.

In addition to BoxLayout in general, I have been working on the
Grid/GridRow/GridItem layouts which are more specific in terms of layout
changes needed, but also can have similar problems.


Although I am seeing improvements with what I have done so far, I'm not
really satisfied with it, and I am keen for input/discussion (or
collaboration). I have been pursuing what I would mostly describe as a
'workaround' approach, so would welcome any thoughts on how best to tackle
this.
I think there is something missing because of the way Flex does layouts vs.
the way Royale does it, but I can't describe it fully yet. Perhaps things
are only currently envisaged to work with mxml declarative content onto
display and not so much with dynamic updates. But I think state-based
changes could have similar effects for some of these things if they happen
inside containers that have their own percent dimensions.


Thanks,
Greg

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Piotr Zarzycki]

We didn't have any vote if someone wanted to be added. I think our project
is bad example to think in a way of voting. It would be very individual. We
knew all people who wanted to be on that page, we didn't expect that there
will be someone from totally outside specialized in migration to Royale,
someone who is silent on that list.

Just look into your project and find the answer there - do you think you
will have request to adding to your page from someone who you do not know
from the list ? - If the answer is NO - you probably don't need vote.

What's more in my opinion I would be against vote anyway whoever would like
to be on such page in case of Royale.

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:59 AM Christofer Dutz 
wrote:

> Hi Piotr,
>
> I was more asking if there is any vote on this ... or is anyone added
> without checks or discussion?
> I'm not asking cause I want to be added ... I'm asking cause I would be
> interested on how you folks decided to do this.
> As I mentioned, we want to implement something similar for PLC4X.
>
> And I would be interested in hearing what you're experience with this is
> in general.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Am 04.06.20, 08:39 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" :
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> I'm not entirely sure what do you ask. However in case of adding
> entries
> you need to take on the list as I asked for a change. Our website is
> unfortunately based on WordPress so someone has to add that. Carlos is
> pretty quick with that, so I asked him.
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:18 AM Christofer Dutz <
> christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
> wrote:
>
> > Sending this again as my last one didn't seem to make it through ...
> >
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > glad you brought this up .. I didn't know there was this page (Found
> it
> > quite hard to reach)
> > We were discussing doing something similar in PLC4X.
> >
> > We currently decided to add an "adopters" page ... perhaps it would
> be a
> > good idea to add a royale logo above the table as you're having the
> same
> > "problem" we're currently having with our list ... if someone posts
> a link
> > to that page, most chat tools expand this to the first logo, which
> is the
> > "Bowler Hat" logo ...
> >
> > How is the experience with this? Are there many requests coming in?
> We
> > were a little hesitant in PLC4X.
> > What's the process on adding entries? Do I just send an email and
> that's
> > added or is there any PMC voting going on?
> > Just asking cause we're interested in doing something similar.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> >
> >
> > Am 03.06.20, 19:23 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> > Would you be able to change commercial support page in following
> way.
> >
> > 1) In section "Name" add under Prominic.NET in the second line
> > Moonshine
> > IDE link https://moonshine-ide.com/
> > 2) In section "Contact Email" change to sa...@moonshine-ide.com
> > 3) Short Description: Could you make as a link following sentence
> > "porting
> > Apache Flex applications to Apache Royale" ->
> > https://moonshine-ide.com/flex-migration/
> >
> > Would it be possible to make all of those changes ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Piotr
> >
> > czw., 8 sie 2019 o 10:48 Carlos Rovira 
> > napisał(a):
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > BowlerHat / Josh Tynjala entry was added to the list too :)
> > >
> > > Best
> > >
> > > Carlos
> > >
> > > El mié., 7 ago. 2019 a las 21:43, Andrew Wetmore (<
> > cottag...@gmail.com>)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > That looks very good, with the list of providers above the
> > qualifications
> > > > for getting added to the list.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 2:18 PM Yishay Weiss <
> > yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Good to hear Carlos, thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > > From: Carlos Rovira 
> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:57:58 PM
> > > > > To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > > > Subject: Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR
> and
> > Royale)
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Piotr, Yshay,
> > > > >
> > > > > entry is now added and published :)
> > > > >
> > > > > https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > El mié., 7 ago. 2019 a las 8:07, Piotr Zarzycki (<
> > > > > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
> > > > > escribió:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Carlos,
> > > > > >
>   

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi Piotr,

I was more asking if there is any vote on this ... or is anyone added without 
checks or discussion?
I'm not asking cause I want to be added ... I'm asking cause I would be 
interested on how you folks decided to do this.
As I mentioned, we want to implement something similar for PLC4X.

And I would be interested in hearing what you're experience with this is in 
general.

Chris


Am 04.06.20, 08:39 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" :

Hi Chris,

I'm not entirely sure what do you ask. However in case of adding entries
you need to take on the list as I asked for a change. Our website is
unfortunately based on WordPress so someone has to add that. Carlos is
pretty quick with that, so I asked him.

Thanks,
Piotr

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:18 AM Christofer Dutz 
wrote:

> Sending this again as my last one didn't seem to make it through ...
>
>
> Hi folks,
>
> glad you brought this up .. I didn't know there was this page (Found it
> quite hard to reach)
> We were discussing doing something similar in PLC4X.
>
> We currently decided to add an "adopters" page ... perhaps it would be a
> good idea to add a royale logo above the table as you're having the same
> "problem" we're currently having with our list ... if someone posts a link
> to that page, most chat tools expand this to the first logo, which is the
> "Bowler Hat" logo ...
>
> How is the experience with this? Are there many requests coming in? We
> were a little hesitant in PLC4X.
> What's the process on adding entries? Do I just send an email and that's
> added or is there any PMC voting going on?
> Just asking cause we're interested in doing something similar.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Am 03.06.20, 19:23 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" :
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> Would you be able to change commercial support page in following way.
>
> 1) In section "Name" add under Prominic.NET in the second line
> Moonshine
> IDE link https://moonshine-ide.com/
> 2) In section "Contact Email" change to sa...@moonshine-ide.com
> 3) Short Description: Could you make as a link following sentence
> "porting
> Apache Flex applications to Apache Royale" ->
> https://moonshine-ide.com/flex-migration/
>
> Would it be possible to make all of those changes ?
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> czw., 8 sie 2019 o 10:48 Carlos Rovira 
> napisał(a):
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > BowlerHat / Josh Tynjala entry was added to the list too :)
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> > El mié., 7 ago. 2019 a las 21:43, Andrew Wetmore (<
> cottag...@gmail.com>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > That looks very good, with the list of providers above the
> qualifications
> > > for getting added to the list.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 2:18 PM Yishay Weiss <
> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Good to hear Carlos, thanks.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > From: Carlos Rovira 
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:57:58 PM
> > > > To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > > Subject: Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and
> Royale)
> > > >
> > > > Hi Piotr, Yshay,
> > > >
> > > > entry is now added and published :)
> > > >
> > > > https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > El mié., 7 ago. 2019 a las 8:07, Piotr Zarzycki (<
> > > > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Carlos,
> > > > >
> > > > > Yishay send you logo off the list. Is it ok ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Piotr
> > > > >
> > > > > pon., 5 sie 2019 o 11:32 Piotr Zarzycki <
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> > > > > napisał(a):
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yes! I'm ok!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for asking.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > pon., 5 sie 2019 o 11:13 Yishay Weiss <
> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> > > > > napisał(a):
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Actually, please add a + before the phone number so it
> links to
> > > Skype.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Piotr, are u ok with being added?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> From: Yishay Weiss 
> > > > > >> Sent: Monday, August 5, 2019 12:09:40 PM
> > > > > >> To: 

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Hi Chris,

I'm not entirely sure what do you ask. However in case of adding entries
you need to take on the list as I asked for a change. Our website is
unfortunately based on WordPress so someone has to add that. Carlos is
pretty quick with that, so I asked him.

Thanks,
Piotr

On Thu, Jun 4, 2020, 8:18 AM Christofer Dutz 
wrote:

> Sending this again as my last one didn't seem to make it through ...
>
>
> Hi folks,
>
> glad you brought this up .. I didn't know there was this page (Found it
> quite hard to reach)
> We were discussing doing something similar in PLC4X.
>
> We currently decided to add an "adopters" page ... perhaps it would be a
> good idea to add a royale logo above the table as you're having the same
> "problem" we're currently having with our list ... if someone posts a link
> to that page, most chat tools expand this to the first logo, which is the
> "Bowler Hat" logo ...
>
> How is the experience with this? Are there many requests coming in? We
> were a little hesitant in PLC4X.
> What's the process on adding entries? Do I just send an email and that's
> added or is there any PMC voting going on?
> Just asking cause we're interested in doing something similar.
>
> Chris
>
>
>
> Am 03.06.20, 19:23 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" :
>
> Hi Carlos,
>
> Would you be able to change commercial support page in following way.
>
> 1) In section "Name" add under Prominic.NET in the second line
> Moonshine
> IDE link https://moonshine-ide.com/
> 2) In section "Contact Email" change to sa...@moonshine-ide.com
> 3) Short Description: Could you make as a link following sentence
> "porting
> Apache Flex applications to Apache Royale" ->
> https://moonshine-ide.com/flex-migration/
>
> Would it be possible to make all of those changes ?
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> czw., 8 sie 2019 o 10:48 Carlos Rovira 
> napisał(a):
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > BowlerHat / Josh Tynjala entry was added to the list too :)
> >
> > Best
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> > El mié., 7 ago. 2019 a las 21:43, Andrew Wetmore (<
> cottag...@gmail.com>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > That looks very good, with the list of providers above the
> qualifications
> > > for getting added to the list.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 2:18 PM Yishay Weiss <
> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Good to hear Carlos, thanks.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > From: Carlos Rovira 
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:57:58 PM
> > > > To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > > Subject: Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and
> Royale)
> > > >
> > > > Hi Piotr, Yshay,
> > > >
> > > > entry is now added and published :)
> > > >
> > > > https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > El mié., 7 ago. 2019 a las 8:07, Piotr Zarzycki (<
> > > > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Carlos,
> > > > >
> > > > > Yishay send you logo off the list. Is it ok ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Piotr
> > > > >
> > > > > pon., 5 sie 2019 o 11:32 Piotr Zarzycki <
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> > > > > napisał(a):
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yes! I'm ok!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for asking.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > pon., 5 sie 2019 o 11:13 Yishay Weiss <
> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> > > > > napisał(a):
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Actually, please add a + before the phone number so it
> links to
> > > Skype.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Piotr, are u ok with being added?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> From: Yishay Weiss 
> > > > > >> Sent: Monday, August 5, 2019 12:09:40 PM
> > > > > >> To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > > > >> Subject: RE: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR
> and
> > > Royale)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Looks good to me. Thanks.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 
> > > > > >> From: Carlos Rovira 
> > > > > >> Sent: Monday, August 5, 2019 12:00:08 PM
> > > > > >> To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > > > >> Subject: Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR
> and
> > > Royale)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Yeah! sorry :)
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> https://royale.codeoscopic.com/royale-commercial-support/
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> El lun., 5 ago. 2019 a las 10:49, Yishay Weiss (<
> > > > yishayj...@hotmail.com
> > > > > >)
> > > > > >> escribió:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > >ok, you can check here the addition before publish.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Was there supposed 

Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)

[Christofer Dutz]

Sending this again as my last one didn't seem to make it through ...


Hi folks,

glad you brought this up .. I didn't know there was this page (Found it quite 
hard to reach)
We were discussing doing something similar in PLC4X. 

We currently decided to add an "adopters" page ... perhaps it would be a good 
idea to add a royale logo above the table as you're having the same "problem" 
we're currently having with our list ... if someone posts a link to that page, 
most chat tools expand this to the first logo, which is the "Bowler Hat" logo 
... 

How is the experience with this? Are there many requests coming in? We were a 
little hesitant in PLC4X.
What's the process on adding entries? Do I just send an email and that's added 
or is there any PMC voting going on?
Just asking cause we're interested in doing something similar.

Chris



Am 03.06.20, 19:23 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" :

Hi Carlos,

Would you be able to change commercial support page in following way.

1) In section "Name" add under Prominic.NET in the second line Moonshine
IDE link https://moonshine-ide.com/
2) In section "Contact Email" change to sa...@moonshine-ide.com
3) Short Description: Could you make as a link following sentence "porting
Apache Flex applications to Apache Royale" ->
https://moonshine-ide.com/flex-migration/

Would it be possible to make all of those changes ?

Thanks,
Piotr

czw., 8 sie 2019 o 10:48 Carlos Rovira  napisał(a):

> Hi,
>
> BowlerHat / Josh Tynjala entry was added to the list too :)
>
> Best
>
> Carlos
>
> El mié., 7 ago. 2019 a las 21:43, Andrew Wetmore ()
> escribió:
>
> > That looks very good, with the list of providers above the 
qualifications
> > for getting added to the list.
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 2:18 PM Yishay Weiss 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Good to hear Carlos, thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > > From: Carlos Rovira 
> > > Sent: Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:57:58 PM
> > > To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > Subject: Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and Royale)
> > >
> > > Hi Piotr, Yshay,
> > >
> > > entry is now added and published :)
> > >
> > > https://royale.apache.org/royale-commercial-support/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > El mié., 7 ago. 2019 a las 8:07, Piotr Zarzycki (<
> > > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > Hi Carlos,
> > > >
> > > > Yishay send you logo off the list. Is it ok ?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Piotr
> > > >
> > > > pon., 5 sie 2019 o 11:32 Piotr Zarzycki 
> > > > napisał(a):
> > > >
> > > > > Yes! I'm ok!
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for asking.
> > > > >
> > > > > pon., 5 sie 2019 o 11:13 Yishay Weiss 
> > > > napisał(a):
> > > > >
> > > > >> Actually, please add a + before the phone number so it links to
> > Skype.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Piotr, are u ok with being added?
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> From: Yishay Weiss 
> > > > >> Sent: Monday, August 5, 2019 12:09:40 PM
> > > > >> To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > > >> Subject: RE: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and
> > Royale)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Looks good to me. Thanks.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> From: Carlos Rovira 
> > > > >> Sent: Monday, August 5, 2019 12:00:08 PM
> > > > >> To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > > >> Subject: Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR and
> > Royale)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Yeah! sorry :)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> https://royale.codeoscopic.com/royale-commercial-support/
> > > > >>
> > > > >> El lun., 5 ago. 2019 a las 10:49, Yishay Weiss (<
> > > yishayj...@hotmail.com
> > > > >)
> > > > >> escribió:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > >ok, you can check here the addition before publish.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Was there supposed to be a link?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > El lun., 5 ago. 2019 a las 10:10, Yishay Weiss (<
> > > > yishayj...@hotmail.com
> > > > >> >)
> > > > >> > escribió:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > I’ll try to find one. Thanks!
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > 
> > > > >> > > From: Carlos Rovira 
> > > > >> > > Sent: Monday, August 5, 2019 10:59:51 AM
> > > > >> > > To: dev@royale.apache.org 
> > > > >> > > Subject: Re: Royale Commercial Support Page (was: Fwd: AIR 
and
> > > > Royale)
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Hi Yishay,
> > > >