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 9754D9D74 for ; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 17:00:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 40569 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2012 17:00:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-flex-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 40525 invoked by uid 500); 1 Mar 2012 17:00:16 -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 40516 invoked by uid 99); 1 Mar 2012 17:00:16 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 17:00:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of joaopedromartinsfernandes@gmail.com designates 74.125.83.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.83.47] (HELO mail-ee0-f47.google.com) (74.125.83.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 17:00:09 +0000 Received: by eekc1 with SMTP id c1so254212eek.6 for ; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 08:59:48 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of joaopedromartinsfernandes@gmail.com designates 10.213.114.71 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.213.114.71; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of joaopedromartinsfernandes@gmail.com designates 10.213.114.71 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=joaopedromartinsfernandes@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=joaopedromartinsfernandes@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.213.114.71]) by 10.213.114.71 with SMTP id d7mr472184ebq.27.1330621188433 (num_hops = 1); Thu, 01 Mar 2012 08:59:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=PxS7g/Y2DFpCcU2O28H4X8qpob8qoq87o6/WLE3qSgs=; b=BZZb89QkH43CzFR98AIRLAXzF1NQEcYWOKSB7kXITd3e4RL4QCpvFAtFtMxeqYPth1 hBim7oTaR+gl5ztU7i4w1TfLj9Chuv0tC6qdry1BubObgOGKLtsfpnfXOORG36lwcVDl JKPQVBsUKAyPLx9Se+974Pp7XAPYLEXn4GJ1s= Received: by 10.213.114.71 with SMTP id d7mr359354ebq.27.1330621188259; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 08:59:48 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.14.48.3 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Mar 2012 08:59:27 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jo=E3o_Fernandes?= Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 16:59:27 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [OT] Thoughts on a Apache Flex MVC Framework To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0015174bdd0e41becf04ba3163e1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --0015174bdd0e41becf04ba3163e1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I wonder if the Apache Flex couldn't be splitted in core and extensions? In the core we could have what we have now as the SDK + compiler, what is required to get the job done (primary project target) and extensions could be small projects that could be associated as enhancements of the project, like FlexUnit, FlexCover, BlazeDS, etc, but aren't considered a requirement to have a flex app running. Just my 2 cents. Jo=E3o Fernandes --0015174bdd0e41becf04ba3163e1--