royale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Peter Ent <p...@adobe.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: Royale Simple(jsonly) and More
Date Wed, 25 Apr 2018 14:13:27 GMT
Hi,

I have renamed the repository to "royale-simple-jsonly" and changed the
ActionScript project name to Simple and the package name to "simple" as
well. 

https://github.com/pentapache/royale-simple-jsonly/wiki

Enjoy!
—peter

On 4/24/18, 11:07 AM, "Peter Ent" <pent@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:

>I do like simple-js-only but that's not really what it could be. I didn't
>turn off the SWF build for the repo because I thought maybe I (or someone
>else) would go back and add the SWF side. I did write that at this point
>it is JS-only, but it still stands as possible to add SWF.
>
>We have -asjs which is really -asjs+swf+js or, more important, it can be
>anything.
>
>However, given that right now it is a JS-only code base, I think naming it
>simple-js-only is a better choice. I will work on renaming it over the
>next few days.
>
>Thank you so much for your input.
>‹peter
>
>On 4/24/18, 4:28 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
><carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrovira@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>maybe better saying what's in and not what's out. For example
>>"royale-simple-js-only" ?
>>
>>just my 2 :)
>>
>>2018-04-24 8:36 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.invalid>:
>>
>>> IMO, "simple" is too subjective.  IMO, the name should indicate the key
>>> differentiators.  So "no-swf" might be part of the name.
>>>
>>> My 2 cents,
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> On 4/23/18, 11:59 AM, "Peter Ent" <pent@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>>>
>>>     Hi,
>>>
>>>     I picked "Foundation" because "Basic" was taken and I was thinking
>>>of
>>>     "foundation classes". I guess I should have been more open on the
>>>list
>>>     that I was creating a new set of components. I did this as a fun
>>>task
>>> for
>>>     myself while I was discharging all of the thoughts on Royale Basic
>>>in
>>> my
>>>     head about these years in FlexJS/Royale and I wanted to preserve
>>>those
>>>     thoughts. I did not intend this to be disruptive in any way; I
>>>didn't
>>>     think people would be obliged to look at it right away (or even at
>>>all
>>> if
>>>     they didn't feel interested).
>>>
>>>     Perhaps it is best if I rename the repository. How do you feel
>>>about
>>>     "royale-simple"? I think "simple" is good because the classes are
>>>not
>>> that
>>>     complex.
>>>
>>>     I have been asked why I thought this was necessary to do and if I
>>> looked
>>>     at the MDL project to see about leveraging it. I did not look at
>>>MDL (I
>>>     did follow MDL when it was being developed but it has been a long
>>> while),
>>>     but I have today gone back and looked at some key classes.
>>>
>>>     First, this project was not necessary to fill any deficiencies in
>>> Royale.
>>>     This was, as I said above, just a fun project for me. I like to
>>>write
>>>     code. There's something very creative about starting with a nearly
>>> blank
>>>     slate and producing something, even if something like already
>>>exists.
>>>
>>>     One main thing I did that is different from MDL and Basic, is that
>>>I
>>> made
>>>     everything inherit from a common base class - UIComponent. In Basic
>>> (and
>>>     MDL), buttons are different due to their SWF-side implementation. I
>>> made
>>>     Buttons a UIComponent and I made the Application a UIComponent as
>>> well. I
>>>     also enhanced IUIBase and added other properties. I also wanted to
>>> give it
>>>     some Flex-like appeal so I kept some of the same class names that I
>>> liked;
>>>     I was inspired by revisiting Flex recently.
>>>
>>>     There is nothing wrong with what we have created in Royale. I think
>>>it
>>> is
>>>     a testament to its design that a new framework can be added without
>>> much
>>>     work and demonstrates to people that they can make their own
>>>frameworks
>>>     using Apache Royale as their starting point.
>>>
>>>     I'll wait a few days and if there are no objections, I'll rename
>>>     "royale-foundation" to "royale-simple".
>>>
>>>     Thanks,
>>>     Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>     On 4/22/18, 7:55 PM, "Niclas Hedhman" <hedhman@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>     >If this goes forward, I hope to see a different name... Apache
>>>Royale
>>>     >Foundation sounds like some daughter/sibling organization of
>>>Apache
>>>     >Software Foundation.
>>>     >
>>>     >I.e. I understand that "Foundation" here is similar to that of
>>> Microsoft
>>>     >Foundation Classes, but due to ASF's name, I think it is
>>>unfortunate
>>> if
>>>     >this name persist.
>>>     >
>>>     >My 2 cent
>>>     >Niclas
>>>     >
>>>     >On Mon, Apr 23, 2018, 00:37 Peter Ent <pent@adobe.com.invalid>
>>>wrote:
>>>     >
>>>     >> Hi,
>>>     >>
>>>     >> As many of you know, over five years ago Adobe Systems donated
>>>Flex
>>> to
>>>     >>the
>>>     >> Apache Foundation. My time on this mission is drawing to a close
>>>in
>>> a
>>>     >> couple of weeks. I am actively trying to find a new position
>>>within
>>>     >>Adobe.
>>>     >> I hope to continue to participate in the Royale project, but
>>>that
>>> may be
>>>     >> determined by my next employer/manager.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> In the meantime, I decided to look back through all my notes and
>>> ideas
>>>     >>and
>>>     >> I created a "thesis" project to express what I've learned and to
>>> leave
>>>     >>my
>>>     >> ideas out there for others to use.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> I've created what I call "Apache Royale Foundation" - an
>>> alternative to
>>>     >> the Basic project in Royale. I have this stored in a public
>>>     >>repository[1],
>>>     >> separate from royale-asjs. The Foundation project (in
>>>     >>frameworks/projects)
>>>     >> would be a sibling to Basic, but I needed to make a few changes
>>>to
>>> the
>>>     >>Core
>>>     >> project and I did not want take the chance of messing up the
>>> royale-asjs
>>>     >> repository, even with a separate branch. I just felt it was
>>>safer to
>>>     >>make a
>>>     >> new public repo using my Apache Github account.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> The royale-foundation repo is a downsized version of
>>>royale-asjs. I
>>> took
>>>     >> only a handful of projects from frameworks (e.g., Core, Network)
>>> that I
>>>     >> thought I could make use of either directly in Foundation or in
>>>     >>examples. I
>>>     >> set up the commits to first put in the downsized code, then
>>>changes
>>> to
>>>     >> Core, then the main Foundation classes. This way you can see
>>>what
>>>     >>changes
>>>     >> were made to Core (mainly to IUIBase and a just a few others).
>>>     >>
>>>     >> For a more detailed explanation of Foundation, I wrote a Wiki
>>> page[2] to
>>>     >> go with the code. I really wanted to see what writing an
>>>     >> almost-from-scratch framework involved. I decided to ignore the
>>> Flash
>>>     >> Player and concentrate exclusively on HTML/JS. While
>>> royale-foundation
>>>     >>will
>>>     >> build something on the SWF side, it will either not run or
>>>produce
>>> just
>>>     >>a
>>>     >> blank window. This was a fun project to fill the time and
>>>improve my
>>>     >> JavaScript and CSS skills while looking for my next challenge.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> I could not have done this without the Core project and the work
>>>of
>>>     >> everyone who has contributed to Royale. There are a lot of
>>> background
>>>     >> pieces that go into make a framework viable and I made use of
>>>them
>>> as
>>>     >>much
>>>     >> as possible.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> I suggest starting with the Wiki[2] before looking at the
>>>code[1].
>>> Once
>>>     >> you do get the code, you should be able to build it using ANT (I
>>> did not
>>>     >> modify the maven pom files yet) and then build the examples.
>>>     >>
>>>     >> [1] Apache Royale Foundation Repo:
>>>     >>
>>>     >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>>> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
>>>     
>>>>>om%2Fpentapache%2Froyale-foundation&data=02%7C01%7Cpent%40adobe.com
>>> %7C5cf
>>>     >>7d87b0ef34ce3818c08d5a8aca1d9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>>> cee1%7C0%7C0%
>>>     >>7C636600381788184543&sdata=gpllo0jYdNsp%
>>> 2FWQm0R7Lxi57l4muoyWX7Tf9YKZaF%2F
>>>     >>Y%3D&reserved=0
>>>     >>
>>>     >> [2] Apache Royale Foundation Wiki (in the Repo):
>>>     >>
>>>     >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>>> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
>>>     >>om%2Fpentapache%2Froyale-foundation%2Fwiki&data=02%7C01%7Cpent%
>>> 40adobe.co
>>>     
>>>>>m%7C5cf7d87b0ef34ce3818c08d5a8aca1d9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>>> cee1%7
>>>     >>C0%7C0%7C636600381788184543&sdata=MtF1eGblWYuSi%
>>> 2F3nBxEulYrJg%2Fz5u6FliZt
>>>     >>2SjT%2F0po%3D&reserved=0
>>>     >>
>>>     >> Regards,
>>>     >> Peter Ent
>>>     >>
>>>     >>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>-- 
>>Carlos Rovira
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>>2
>>Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Cpent%40adobe.com%7C0f679c51ad234ba737d208d5a
>>9
>>bd764a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601553580689134&sd
>>a
>>ta=cgXmmJUy8di%2Fu%2BqcRJ%2FtV5YgQVTlnYdTs6hzM8Bgp8U%3D&reserved=0
>

Mime
View raw message