Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of
 constantinnovationsinc@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted
 sender)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of constantinnovationsinc@gmail.com
 designates 10.204.131.74 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.204.131.74;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <EB6F7A48D477254EAB8F675582F80CD7136F7E@DPSBS1.digitalprimates.local>
References: 
 <CAEFz_vuNuXuoJ3fMFmfGExutGy4T_8u9bUfBxQBkhsfHmdW9aw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACK5iZdayrjjAQP3fAd2jW-yx-2hbPDcj24GdX_vBr9Tc_6L2A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOj8ovyJ7Mw=svtYBk9_OW10rbjer9bAsFRSyUCUpeMJJFrusA@mail.gmail.com>
	<EB6F7A48D477254EAB8F675582F80CD71353EB@DPSBS1.digitalprimates.local>
	<CAOj8ovyahNjqs18z-BZJsGT=EB3-c64qxsxgsCKPihCsOUCzmQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<EB6F7A48D477254EAB8F675582F80CD7135848@DPSBS1.digitalprimates.local>
	<CAOj8ovwumvydZt0Onyq1Yc1wDPbRGSJXa-th_zMCYYRk7Mc98w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACK5iZf2QsK4uSHXVHb+bV1WdaYv1YZFt47Vi2s6+x6yA8F17A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F51FC95.6000204@gmail.com>
	<CAOj8ovxb4-7J+qiSzBPayiDKa78uH7CdTngEoQNXyNsy=Kj_wg@mail.gmail.com>
	<EB6F7A48D477254EAB8F675582F80CD7136F7E@DPSBS1.digitalprimates.local>
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 20:21:43 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CAB9EJuwOtxCUGjVAU=3epwFX1XEpub9BpFTM+vMbjPv02B71+g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why Spark? (was Re: s:Spacer (was Re: Missing Spark components))
From: Tony Constantinides <constantinnovationsinc@gmail.com>
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00151747bd0c7e526504ba774322

--00151747bd0c7e526504ba774322
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

My issue with this whole issue is choice.
Even if I select "Spark only" its loads the MX library core and  Spark
components which are based on mx.core.UIComponent.
I love the desire for backward compatibility but GIVE ME A CHOICE to cut
the mx framework loose. Its still loads 6 RSL
with its loading time which people use as the excuse to dump Flex. Unless
this is FIXED, this framework does not have a
snowball chance of Hell of every be successful.
Suggestion: Based Spark classes on a SPARK base framework class and not
mx.core.UIComponent with its 14 thousand
lines of code.
Over engineered much?
I already building up my own Spark custom framework rather than the one
from Flex 4.6.
I basically getting components only as 1/3 as big and running nice and
fast. Although I like the Flex framework
I like to use less functionality and get smaller components than the option
of loading two frameworks


On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Michael A. Labriola <
labriola@digitalprimates.net> wrote:

> > In Conclusion in my opinion:
> > Spark should be the base for all components from now on.
> > MX should die mainly because we cant use it for Mobile and it is not
> > based on Spark (that makes the SDK more hard to maintain).
>
> MX can't die. It is still used by many more projects than Spark. It will
> need to be maintained for the foreseeable future
>
> > A new components list based on Spark should replace MX for easy and
> > simple skinning use cases.
>
> I think it's fine to have a rich set of skins that you can use if you want
> all of those styling attributes. I would hate to penalize every project
> though. It still seems to me that, like HGroup and VGroup, we can extend
> all of these classes and put them in a library... perhaps SparkSimple. It's
> nothing but composed versions of the other classes with a more full
> featured skin and additional style declarations. To me that would be the
> way to solve both issue.
>
>

--00151747bd0c7e526504ba774322--