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 stefan.horochovec@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.217.175 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50A63661.9010508@gmail.com>
References: <50A63661.9010508@gmail.com>
From: Stefan Horochovec <stefan.horochovec@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 11:01:58 -0200
Message-ID: 
 <CANNLw__E7i9_qsk_HqKE2i5++J42dGkd027kZ+gDeu3KxsSRNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [POLL] - Must Flex 5 be a complete rewrite or can flex code base
 be re-architectured?
To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04088d23a5575b04ce9c60f3

--f46d04088d23a5575b04ce9c60f3
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Well.

As I said in a previous email, without knowing properly how will the AS4
and especially the AVMNext, I think is hard to guess that the best option
is this moment. The unique concrete information we have is an email from
Thibault warning about using Stage3D instead of DisplayObject.

When we talk about the future of a framework, just use it as information
for a decision such as this strikes me as inconsistent. However, if it is
necessary to rewrite the SDK, compiler, etc.. re-structuring the
architecture of the SDK can be quite interesting.

Regards


Stefan Horochovec


2012/11/16 s=E9bastien Paturel <sebpatu.flex@gmail.com>

> After several discussions about the difficulty to break UIComponent for
> example, and the whole re-architecturing of flex SDK issue.
> I'd like to launch this poll to see if there's a consensus about it.
>
> So in your opinion flex SDk:
>
> 1- Need a complete re write
> 2- Can be re architectured from the current code base
>
> Thanks
>
>

--f46d04088d23a5575b04ce9c60f3--