flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
Subject Re: About legacy IDEs (Re: AW: [FALCONJX] Combining SWF and JS compilers)
Date Fri, 03 Feb 2017 11:01:48 GMT
Hi Carlos,

I see it the same way as you ☺

But I wouldn’t drop support for FB, the thing I was proposing, was to make the default FlexJS
SDK targeted for non-legacy IDEs and tools and to have a “legacy-ide” profile (in Maven
terms) in which someone requiring it could enable a patch-layer that satisfies the legacy
tools. 

Similarly, I was suggesting to have the descriptor.xml contain the real version number “0.7.0”
or “0.8.0-SNAPSHOT” and if the “legacy” profile is enabled, then it gets the prefix
of “4.8.” to satisfy FB. I still think we shouldn’t be shipping our new tool with legacy
support enabled per default. I think it should eventually be something you can enable in the
installer and/or the build.

I still think if we start shipping our SDK with legacy things in the default distribution,
tool vendors will start relying on these hacks and we will have to continue to support them
in the future.

Chris


Am 03.02.17, 10:32 schrieb "carlos.rovira@gmail.com im Auftrag von Carlos Rovira" <carlos.rovira@gmail.com
im Auftrag von carlosrovira@apache.org>:

    Hi,
    
    (coming from the other thread and removing test and renaming thread)
    
    in all this conversation I have the sense that Alex is always looking to be
    compliant with old IDEs (I'm specially talking about FB) and don't
    understand the reason behind. I think this is making us far to get a
    solution for the real problem and even could be counterproductive.
    
    Let me try to explain my way of thinking: People using FB today are people
    using Flex SDK, no other people is using it (or at least should be
    residual) since is a product without maintenance for 6-7 years and stuck in
    the past. Many people coming to FlexJS already made a transition from FB to
    other IDEs (mainly IntelliJ IDEA) for many reasons, better refactoring, a
    great tech stack, maven support for Flex,...
    
    Now let's try to think in FlexJS...we are creating a technology from
    scratch. There's almost no legacy internals in what we are doing, but since
    there was so many great things in the old Flex philosophy we are importing
    it into FlexJS, but integrating with many new ones. Remember how many work
    we need in the past to get rid of SVN and adopt GIT? Thanks to god we did
    it. Remember how hard was to get Maven building? (only Chris knows the deep
    implications of this one). Those are only two examples of things with lot
    of impact in what we are today. All this things has bring us the
    possibilities that we have now. Talking now about me, without Git and
    Maven, I'll be not here, since it would be so hard to me think in older
    terms than that.
    
    So please, people working on Flex SDK, should has FB in mind, that's ok for
    me...is legacy sdk maintenance and many of them sure is still using FB,
    break that will be bad from a maintenance perspective.
    
    But all of us working on a modern technology that we call "FlexJS", should
    be running away from FB since instead doing something for us is penalizing
    us. Each time I read some explanation based on what would be in FB terms,
    or how should do it to make FB happy I think we are in the opposite
    direction. For me those kind of things are very dangerous since not doing
    the right change at a time can kill us before we reach the goal.
    
    If we need to change something that will need some IDE change, we should
    think in new IDEs and talk with their devs to support it. For commercial
    products, like IntelliJ, knowing their politic, I'll let it to them, and
    will concentrate in get as many costumers as we can with our open source
    tools (included OS IDEs), so we get the interest to support us.
    
    FlexJS is not Flex SDK, and even more, people doing Flex apps can't migrate
    to FlexJS with the same code base. People will need to start from scratch,
    but they could use their Flex codebase as a guide to implement their new
    codebase. So there are absolutely no points to stand with FB in 2017 for
    crafting a state of the art technology like FlexJS that tries to compite
    with the main ones out there.
    
    So we'll need to look forward always. Hope people here that is using FB for
    FlexJS could consider to move to other IDEs (specially open source), so
    this will make us truly open source in all means (only can think in flash
    player output dependency, but as a flavor, I think that's not bad and is
    optional) and get rid of any chains that some commercial product could
    impose to us.
    
    All of you working with old tooling, please consider this, since I think is
    very serious thing to take into account.
    
    Thanks!
    
    
    -- 
    Carlos Rovira
    http://about.me/carlosrovira
    

Mime
View raw message