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 BDCAC9958 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:28:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 51079 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2012 21:28:38 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 51029 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2012 21:28:38 -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 51021 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2012 21:28:38 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 21:28:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL,TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: 209.85.214.175 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of rsantos@spectacompany.com.br) Received: from [209.85.214.175] (HELO mail-tul01m020-f175.google.com) (209.85.214.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 21:28:30 +0000 Received: by obqv19 with SMTP id v19so1297579obq.6 for ; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 13:28:08 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rsantos@spectacompany.com.br designates 10.182.38.7 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.182.38.7; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rsantos@spectacompany.com.br designates 10.182.38.7 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rsantos@spectacompany.com.br Received: from mr.google.com ([10.182.38.7]) by 10.182.38.7 with SMTP id c7mr2570822obk.44.1330637288361 (num_hops = 1); Thu, 01 Mar 2012 13:28:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.182.38.7 with SMTP id c7mr2230430obk.44.1330637288267; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 13:28:08 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.216.68 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 13:27:47 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Rafael Santos Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 18:27:47 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [OT] Thoughts on a Apache Flex MVC Framework To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d0447f28ce4601604ba3522b4 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm271IMJQUJb1YSfk/7QXQCzbT4uFtjcgluHN1RlOZkAgJNasrHKtWt1uyL9E6Na278QL94 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --f46d0447f28ce4601604ba3522b4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Great... good discussion.... I don't think a mvc framework should go in the core framework of flex... It doesn't make sense.... I agree on that 100% The idea of extensions sound great to me, but I don't have a lot of experience with this idea on an opensource project to suggest a model that would work.... The only experience I have is with Dokuwiki and a little from Eclipse. What I got from Dokuwiki is that if the core team is not somehow compromised with the extensions, they simply die with time and they start not being available for future releases of the core.... So with time people just stop using extensions because they know that with time they will break.... So sometimes it is simply no worth to have them if anyone will commit to it... I mean... If there is no roadmap where the extensions have some or any importance.... Eclipse is a project that embraces the extensions for example... That model seems to work.... The extensions have value for the overall goals of the project... Rafael Santos - Specta @rafaelspecta --f46d0447f28ce4601604ba3522b4--