flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [FLEXJS] New Default Component Set (was Re: [FlexJS, MDL] Why binding is not working in MDL example)
Date Tue, 03 Jan 2017 18:55:40 GMT
Sorry, I am a bit late into this thread, but I like 'default' for heavy and
'lightweight' for the basic ones.

Thanks,
Om



On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 10:39 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

> IMO, "Express" is the best idea so far.  I also thought of "Loaded" (with
> beads), "Beaded", "Quickstart".
>
> Peter, if you want to get started, make a folder called Express.  We can
> always change it later.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 1/3/17, 10:31 AM, "Peter Ent" <pent@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> >I think "Express" isn't a bad name for this. It implies that you can get
> >something running quickly.
> >
> >Another name I thought of was "Star" (FlexJS Star).
> >
> >A third choice might be "Prime", meaning the main one to use.
> >
> >‹peter
> >
> >On 1/3/17, 12:14 PM, "Dev LFM" <developerlfm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>I've been listening this thread, sorry my intrusion..
> >>
> >>Why not simply:
> >>
> >>- ComponentBase for the current set without beads, and "Component" for
> >>the
> >>ones with default beads included?
> >>
> >>I like "Express" too but not making much sense to me.
> >>
> >>My 2 cents ^^
> >>
> >>2017-01-03 16:53 GMT+00:00 Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> The original thread is another example of where PAYG becomes PITA.  On
> >>> another thread, Om wants to bake in HTML sanitization by default.  IMO,
> >>> these are things that should go in a heavier component set with more
> >>> things baked in.  IMO, this new, heavier component set would be the
> >>> default for FlexJS.  No more forgetting to add DataBinding beads, or
> >>> SimpleCSSValuesImpl, etc.  Fewer tags to write.
> >>>
> >>> I've asked Peter to start on it so you can see how to bake stuff in and
> >>> how much simpler it will make our examples.  I think it will help in
> >>> getting folks started with fewer problems.  I think we've proven that
> >>>we
> >>> can composite basic things into more complex things.
> >>>
> >>> But, we need a good name for this set.  I don't like "Heavy".  Makes me
> >>> think it would be too fat and slow.  I've ruled out for now "Kitchen
> >>> Sink", and "Full" (because it won't contain every bead).  I've thought
> >>> about "Medium", "Typical", "Common", "Popular", "POC" (Proof of
> >>>Concept)",
> >>> "RP" (Rapid Prototyping).  Don't like any of them.  What name would
> >>> suggest that it is not on the place to start but that you could use it
> >>>in
> >>> production if you don't run into size/performance issues?
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>> -Alex
> >>>
> >>> On 1/2/17, 11:20 PM, "piotrz" <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >Alex,
> >>> >
> >>> >That's what I'm missing. It's a bit better cause when I add bead
> >>> >"ItemRendererDataBinding" my getter has been fired, although binding
> >>>is
> >>> >still not working. I've just pushed my code. - Not sure what can be
> >>> >wrong.
> >>> >
> >>> >I have to admit I'm still thinking to much Flex instead of FlexJS :)
> >>> >
> >>> >Piotr
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >-----
> >>> >Apache Flex PMC
> >>> >piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com
> >>> >--
> >>> >View this message in context:
> >>> >http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.
> >>> com/FlexJS-MDL-Why-bindin
> >>> >g-is-not-working-in-MDL-example-tp57738p57795.html
> >>> >Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at
> >>>Nabble.com.
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message