Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D219EB271 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:53:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 36936 invoked by uid 500); 18 Jan 2012 21:53:20 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 36914 invoked by uid 500); 18 Jan 2012 21:53:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 36905 invoked by uid 99); 18 Jan 2012 21:53:20 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:53:20 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [194.109.204.196] (HELO c00l.c00l.nl) (194.109.204.196) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:53:13 +0000 Received: from [192.168.0.10] (h155145.upc-h.chello.nl [62.194.155.145]) by c00l.c00l.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 235AC1A7AE2 for ; Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:52:51 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Subject: Re: jira task to decide on Apache Flex version number needed From: Arnoud Bos In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:52:50 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <488A21CEB8EB429BBDC2A9B7D0291E12@gmail.com> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) yup exactly how i feel about this. Remember that moving from flex 3 to 4 was a major overhaul.=20 And as a result the conversion from flex3 to flex4 of big projects is = expensive. My project leader on the last project was not happy about the time it = costed to convert the=20 big project to the new flex architecture.=20 I think the more complex it will be to migrate a flex 4.6 project to the = first Apache releases=20 the more people you will loose. You would take the risk of a "nooo not = again!!" sentiment after which people leave. But if you offer a smooth transition in the first place, = fix bugs, offer the missing components, optimize... You will keep the people onboard, give them (renewed) = confidence in the Flex project. I think that would be an awesome start of Apache = Flex! On 18-01-2012, at 21:37, Doug McCune wrote: >>=20 >> If we include bug >> fixes or new features then maybe not. >=20 >=20 > One of the reasons for people being optimistic about the move to = Apache is > the opportunity for bugs that people couldn't get Adobe to fix to get > fixed. To show progress and momentum I'd urge you all to try to fix = some > bugs and get releases out there that people can just drop in, so = they'll > say "Finally, bug XYZ is fixed, thank god this moved to Apache, I see = the > benefit...". If you force everyone to rewrite their apps using the new > packages throughout you're going to lose those people from your cause. Met vriendelijke groet, Arnoud Bos Artim interactive T +31 6 246 40 216 E arnoud@artim-interactive.nl