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 Thu, 30 Jul 2015 20:51:39 GMT
Well, Peter found an issue with the install script so hold off before
having others try it.


On 7/30/15, 6:25 AM, "Alex Harui" <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

>I have wired a build from Tuesday into the Installer as the “FlexJS
>Nightly Build”.  You have to right-click and select “Show Dev Builds” to
>see it in the list.   I will update those builds on occasion but not
>always “nightly”.  Please try it and see if all of the externs stuff got
>in there, and the latest FDB, and if it still works in IJ.
>Still no word from the MSDN folks so the CI server is still asleep.  What
>form did others use to apply for Apache MSDN?  Maybe I’m using the wrong
>On 7/29/15, 3:37 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphixllc@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Alex, you know I was being sarcastic. :) I agree with showing things that
>>work. BUT I am hearing stories of "pioneers" that want to try it right
>>and one, have know idea what it is or how to start, two, don't know where
>>to start and three, ask people like me that is a developer and I have to
>>tell them I don't even know how to get a nightly right now.
>>So... I guess it would be nice, just to get something in a stable release
>>so we have STEP ONE, I know Carlos wants step 10 but we have to get to
>>one right now or else it's going to fail.
>>On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> On 7/29/15, 3:24 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphixllc@gmail.com>
>>> >On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 6:02 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala
>>> ><bigosmallm@gmail.com>
>>> >wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> +1 for a release of FlexJS.  It would be great to highlight and talk
>>> >>about
>>> >> the new version of FlexJS at ApacheCon Europe on Oct 1st, 2015.
>>> >>
>>> >> I have been talking to various folks (outside of Apache) about
>>> >>One
>>> >> feedback I've received is that the version number of 0.02 makes
>>> >>think
>>> >> that it is not ready to be taken seriously.  It is hard to convince
>>> >>folks
>>> >> to start using it if it has an 'alpha only' sheen to it.  I really
>>> >> 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
>>> >>at
>>> >> 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
>>> >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
>>> >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
>>> then I’d say we are ready to tell more folks about it by giving it a
>>> 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
>>> make the Windows side work better out of the box but yes, it should be
>>> more iterative than once a year going forward.
>>> -Alex

View raw message