Mailing-List: contact flex-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sebpatu.flex@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.214.47 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <50A66641.6010301@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:13:53 +0100
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?s=E9bastien_Paturel?= <sebpatu.flex@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64;
 rv:16.0) Gecko/20121026 Thunderbird/16.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: How to prepare Apache Flex 5 to run in the new AVM in Flashplayer
 12?
References: <CCCA9DFB.488E0%aharui@adobe.com> <50A63BAE.2040203@gmail.com>
 <CAJs+wW1AKdJ8=MTAsicOx55ZKFR6EjFgsekK92iP7LrG6FJuRw@mail.gmail.com>
 <50A6415F.2060003@gmail.com>
 <CAJs+wW0BE7mMfL_psqhcdLmSyzBYmoJdgEuudXCWpkpJ1w0Bkg@mail.gmail.com>
 <50A6533A.9020103@gmail.com>
 <CAEFz_vsC5fn7JB4gCWgJsUAiUW+g-wyYaOZTh1x=nCC8v6u7eA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEFz_vsC5fn7JB4gCWgJsUAiUW+g-wyYaOZTh1x=nCC8v6u7eA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I don't see a problem here.
Its a fact that flex USE Adobe runtimes to target as much platforms as 
it can.
Its because of history of flex. and because until recent time, it was a 
very efficient tool to achieve that.
If FalconJS was a fully usable solution, it would run on something else 
then Adobe runtime, would it still be flex? of course yes.
Because as you say yourself, those runtimes are not part of Flex. "Flex 
just happens to be able to take advantage of that runtime to target 
different platforms"
Thats why it has nothing to do with the definition of flex (in its essence).

"so you're not actually describing something that is under Apache Flex 
control"
it would be the case if in fact i put Adobe runtimes in my definition of 
flex, which i don't.

  Le 16/11/2012 16:17, Omar Gonzalez a �crit :
> The problem with your definition, S�bastien, is that you target all of
> those platforms via AIR, so you're not actually describing something that
> is under Apache Flex control. Flex just happens to be able to take
> advantage of that runtime to target different platforms.
>
> Using haxe as a language would allow us to target multiple platforms in a
> similar way to Flex/AIR. To me it sounds much more intriguing to explore a
> future for Flex without AS3 or the AIR runtime.
>
> -omar
>
> On Friday, November 16, 2012, s�bastien Paturel wrote:
>
>> Why you say its too generic?
>> Maybe the "many platforms" is too generic, and i could precise Desktop,
>> browsers, tablets and smartphones?
>>
>> What other framework/language can achieve that today?
>> then you can find some Flex competitors which don't do the job with same
>> easiness and succes.
>> Bottomline for me is the number of target platforms supported, the power
>> of the OOP language used, and the richness of the API and components.
>> Haxe could also apply to my definition, but theres no MXML equivalent, and
>> its more low level good for games but not for RIA.
>>
>> I'm using flex for cross browser desktop applications, and i will soon use
>> it for smartphone and tablets deployment, all that using the same
>> environment and great API.
>> I'm just wondering how long it will be able to achieve that. And if it
>> means that it must drop AS3 to do so, than its ok for me.
>> When i talk about re write, i don't mean changing the whole API!
>>
>> You did not answer, what is flex for you, and how you see a viable future
>> for it as cross platform if it keeps AS3?
>> If you find an efficient solution, its fine for me. But if not?
>>
>> Would you say that this definition is too generic?
>> "Apache Flex� is a highly productive, open source application framework
>> for building and maintaining expressive web applications that deploy
>> consistently on all major browsers, desktops and devices (including
>> smartphones, tablets and tv)."
>>
>>
>> Le 16/11/2012 15:23, Erik de Bruin a �crit :
>>
>> Sebastien,
>>
>> You write: "For me it's a framework for RIA, with descriptive language for
>> UI, giving the possibility to have one code base and many platform
>> targets."
>>
>> I'm not disagreeing, but that description is so generic that any number of
>> frameworks/languages fit. Let me ask it another way: why are you using Flex
>> at the moment? What makes Flex your tool of choice?
>>
>> EdB
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:36 PM, s�bastien Paturel
>> <sebpatu.flex@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>   If the question was adressed to me :)
>> Then i already answered it several times in the mailing list.
>> And i'd like to have your answer to this question too.
>>
>> Thats why i launched the "what is the essence of flex" thread. But i was
>> dissapointed to not get more answers, especially from commiters.
>>
>> I shared my humble opinion on this subject here:
>> http://mail-archives.apache.****org/mod_mbox/incubator-flex-**
>> dev/201211.mbox/%3C50A55DE7.**608@gmail.com**%3E<http://mail-archives.**
>> apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-**flex-dev/201211.mbox/%**
>> 3C50A55DE7.608@gmail.com%3E<http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-flex-dev/201211.mbox/%3C50A55DE7.608@gmail.com%3E>
>> Feel free to disagree :)
>>
>> Le 16/11/2012 14:30, Erik de Bruin a �crit :
>>
>>    Let me ask you this first: what, in your opinion, is Flex?
>>
>> EdB
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:12 PM, s�bastien Paturel
>> <sebpatu.flex@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>    With that logic, why flex in AS4, or flex in Haxe or whatever not AS3,
>>
>> would make it not to be Flex anymore?
>>
>> I understand the point about the large existing code base in AS3 and the
>> need to port to another language.
>> But when Adobe chose to change from AS2 to AS3 a lot of people ported
>> their code, because it was required.
>> When Adobe changed to Spark, it also needed some rewrite to be able to
>> gain on new capabilities.
>> And if we start a rewrite from scratch, it will be hard to keep
>> everything
>> even in AS3 usable as is or am i wrong?
>> And if people want to use flex for cross platform, and especially HTML5,
>> you saif yourself that if we wanted to be able to get existing flex apps
>> and compile them directly to HTML5 was a dream.
>> Meaning that if people want to gain from new flex capabilities, it will
>> be
>> with new project code, whether it is AS3 or something else.
>>
>> The questions are:
>> - Do we have efficient solutions to keep AS3 and be able to cross compile
>> to every platforms swf, HTML5, native iOS and native Android?
>> For example using Haxe gives a lot of advantages in that regard because
>> theres already a lot of work done for cross platform port and efficiency,
>> and theres a large community around it.
>> The essence of flex is more to be cross platform, than it is AS3 right?
>> so
>> if we don't have efficient solution to cross compile AS3 to platforms
>> other
>> than Adobe runtimes, its a matter of life and death choice:
>> do we prefer keep it in AS3 to keep the existing third party code base,
>> or
>> do we want to survive with new language and stay cross platform but
>> require
>> some rewrites.
>>
>> - Do we want flex to be tight to an abandonned language as AS3? It is
>> like
>> if you were trying to keep an AS2 framework in an AS3 world.
>>
>> - Don't we want Apache flex to be as free as possible and get rid of
>> Adobe
>> technology dependency, meaning AS, flash player, and AIR?
>>
>>
>> Le 15/11/2012 22:26, Alex Harui a �crit :
>>
>>
>>    On 11/15/12 12:24 PM, "s�bastien Paturel" <sebpatu.flex@gmail.com>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     So it means that Flex in AS2 was not flex?
>> It was then, but now now.
>>
>>    Le 15/11/2012 20:50, Alex Harui a �crit :
>>
>>    On 11/15/12 11:44 AM, "s�bastien Paturel" <sebpatu.flex@gmail.com>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>     Why do you thing that using AS4 is the better choice?
>>
>>   It brings me back to the thread (what is t
>>
>>