flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Oprtional MVC/IOC Frameworks Donation: Swiz Framework Donation
Date Sun, 02 Jun 2013 10:06:29 GMT
+1 Binding

Thanks,
Om

On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 3:02 AM, João Fernandes
<joaopedromartinsfernandes@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 (non binding)
>
> To me, all those points were already clear in the previous thread.
>
>
> On 2 June 2013 10:57, Carlos Rovira <carlosrovira@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non binding)
>>
>>
>> 2013/6/2 Carlos Rovira <carlosrovira@apache.org>
>>
>> > This vote comes from an original vote thread declared as null (see
>> > original thread for info about motivations):
>> >
>> > http://markmail.org/message/o6zjmorfh4lxuygo
>> >
>> > The new vote thread is considering the donation of the optional MVC/IOC
>> > Swiz Framework.
>> >
>> > Points taken from the original vote thread:
>> >
>> > * Swiz is a great addition to Apache Flex since it complements de SDK
>> with
>> > a microarquitecture for application MVC, IOC, DI very simple and well
>> > designed. * This will be a project like flexunit or utilities. So it's
>> > optional a NOT part of the main sdk. * Swiz is already in 1.4.0 stable
>> > version, under Apache License 2.0, has its community and right now
>> there's
>> > no maintenance or upgrade since people behind the project is no longer
>> > working with Flex technology. * Donation will be 1.4.0 source code and
>> wiki
>> > content. * Future plans: if donation is successful, Chris Scott (creator
>> of
>> > Swiz) will want to donate experimental 2.0.0 branch that brings AOP
>> > support, a feature that could bring a great benefit to Apache Flex since
>> it
>> > brings something very new to client web technologies and that will
>> require
>> > evolution at compiler level (introducing compile time weaving).
>> >
>> >
>> > Here's the new points from Alex Harui to make clear what it implies:
>> >
>> > 1) Swiz goes in its own repo.  The original proposal says it could go
>> into
>> > a folder under utilities, but I think flexunit is a better model.
>> > 2) Swiz will have active development but release separately from the SDK.
>> > The activity level isn't quite clear from the original proposal.  People
>> > need to be comfortable that this activity isn't an endorsement or
>> > favoritism.
>> > 3) Acceptance of Swiz is not an endorsement or favoritism.
>> > 4) Any other app framework is welcomed to be donated via the same
>> process.
>> >
>> > This vote thread will be open for the next 72 hours
>> >
>> > Please make your vote.
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> João Fernandes

Mime
View raw message