Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: softfail (nike.apache.org: transitioning domain of
 david@davidarno.org does not designate 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <1329412054.4357.9.camel@lapsang>
Subject: Re: Time for an Apache Flex compiler.
From: David Arno <david@davidarno.org>
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 17:07:34 +0000
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEFz_vvUeSbsZf1d5Tiyv5DvW3hpCq2VUiv9HL-t8otvJvy3Yw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CB626F6F.9D56%cframpto@adobe.com>
	 <1329408607.2688.8.camel@lapsang>
	 <CAEFz_vvUeSbsZf1d5Tiyv5DvW3hpCq2VUiv9HL-t8otvJvy3Yw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0

On Thu, 2012-02-16 at 08:47 -0800, Omar Gonzalez wrote:
> Mind communicating that last thought in a clear fashion? :P I don't
> understand what your complaint is, Carol is simply explaining Adobe's time
> frame, what problem so you see in such a simple statement?
If one uses the abbreviation "Q4" without clarifying what it represents
in a document such as the Flex "roadmap", then it is reasonable to
expect people to assume it refers to the last quarter of the calendar
year. If ones company has a fiscal year that differs from the calendar
year, then - to avoid confusion - it is import to clarify what is meant
be "Q4."

The fact that the author(s) of the roadmap failed to clarify what they
meant by "Q4" is typical of Adobe's tendency to mismanage their
communications at the moment. It should not have needed Carol to clarify
it.

My apologies if my previous statement failed to convey this ;)
David.