flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [FlexJS][FalconJX] Ready for another release?
Date Wed, 29 Jul 2015 22:32:43 GMT

On 7/29/15, 3:24 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphixllc@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 6:02 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
>> +1 for a release of FlexJS.  It would be great to highlight and talk
>> the new version of FlexJS at ApacheCon Europe on Oct 1st, 2015.
>> I have been talking to various folks (outside of Apache) about FlexJS.
>> feedback I've received is that the version number of 0.02 makes folks
>> that it is not ready to be taken seriously.  It is hard to convince
>> to start using it if it has an 'alpha only' sheen to it.  I really think
>> that the next version should be at a 1.0 release.  Even if it is not
>> perfect, the FlexJS already has a lot of strong things going for it.  I
>> don't think we should keep it under the covers anymore, i.e. keeping it
>> a sub 1.0 release version.
>> Thoughts?
>Or at least 0.5 or 1.0 alpha. :) I know there are 1000's of hours into the
>compiler/transpiler/eternc side so having it at 0.0.2 really sucks.
>I know what Carlos is saying but the damn thing need to just have a
>release, then release again, and again adding things. This isn't a fashion
>show where you get one walk down the ile, it's iterative. Haha

My philosophy is to set expectations low and exceed them.  Once I hear
that folks on this list are actually building things that work with FlexJS
then I’d say we are ready to tell more folks about it by giving it a 1.0
version.  My goal after this release is to try to get something useful
running.  I’m sort of leaning toward this still being 0.0.3 and then
trying to get that something running and call it 0.5 or 0.9 and then if
someone else is successful that can be 1.0.

I am going to spend a bit of time this week on some polish and trying to
make the Windows side work better out of the box but yes, it should be
more iterative than once a year going forward.


View raw message