You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Amit Goel <ag...@gmail.com> on 2012/01/15 07:41:13 UTC
Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
With all due respect to community, it makes me skeptic about what actually
Adobe is donating to Apache, and what/where Apache community is heading
with it. Correct me if I am wrong:
Adobe will be donating the Flex SDK, and not the AVM/playerglobals etc. So
Adobe will continue to own the legacy on Flash and it's heart -
ActionScript/AVM. I am just thinking past sometime around the period of
Flex3, if this same incubation could have done that time, is there a single
member in the community could even think of developing Flex4 SDK with spark
containers? I believe NO. Spark components are real great and cool than
what Halo provided. So now we are restricted to the SDK alone, and has to
wait and see Adobe releases for AVM/Flash Player etc. If they will come up
with some releases, Apache community is going to consume that and then only
next phase of SDK could be think of. Then how is it an opensource project.
The community is just here to develop some more components on top of the
SDK components - that's it? I guess that is what people around are already
doing it since Flex framework has evolved.
Flex Builder is a great tool, that Adobe is not going to donate anyways. I
understand that is the only business it is getting through Flex, so that is
fine. But why no AVM and other legacy without which community is real lame
with having a restricted scope, in which they are to just maintain the Flex
evolution? That means Adobe just wants to get rid of Flex SDK development,
but still holding the legacy! I know Adobe also provided their SDK team's
support to Apache, and promises to continue support to its Flex customer.
But what I see is that scope available for the community seems to be very
restricted, where there is a huge dependency on its original legacy holder
i.e. Adobe itself.
You see Alex telling
here<http://markmail.org/search/?q=Flex%20modularity%20through%20composition%20and%20interfaces#query:Flex%20modularity%20through%20composition%20and%20interfaces+page:1+mid:c274z4qt3e74ri3b+state:results>,
that a blank interface in AVM consumes around 1K and loads extra 250 bytes
to an SWF! What are the ways we can reduce it? Its absolutely - No Way
around, until Adobe itself comes up with some changes to AVM. So at all and
all, we could think of nothing great with Apache Flex, just a support
maintenance and support system for Flex. Ok we have jira
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX>now hosted with Apache for
Flex, we will continue logging SDKs bug which were initially done on
Adobe's site <http://bugs.adobe.com/flex/>. And YES, Adobe will make some
charity(if at all possible) sometime by fixing some of the bugs logged
there via their SDK team. I am saying that becoz Adobe already was lazy
fixing bugs logged under their banner <http://bugs.adobe.com/flex/>.
It reminds me of Steve Jobs criticizing Adobe which created havoc over
Flash/Flex community. I believe this Apache Flex could only be opensource
when community is free to develop the SDK, own the legacy without any
limitations. With this incubation, I was feeling a fresh air of Flex being
opensourced and other major vendors Apple/Google/MicroSoft will adopt it as
a standard, but this is not going to happen anymore, when its creator
itself is taking its hand back on this.
I am a great supporter of Flex, and want Apache Flex to live long!
--
Thanks,
Amit Goel.
RE: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by FRANKLIN GARZON <fg...@hotmail.com>.
We will review the possibility to join maybe 1 developer full time into Apache Flex contributor from us, I will propose to our CEO. I will know some weeks later if this is possbile.
Franklin Garzón
Regional Development Manager
MCTS - MCITP Microsoft SQLServer 2005
*Si el hombre dejara de aprender entonces dejaría de existir*
094496862 / 593-022234585
> From: david@davidarno.org
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
> Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 16:01:47 +0000
>
> From: Amit Goel [mailto:agoel.khs@gmail.com]
> Sent: 15 January 2012 06:41
>
> > Adobe will be donating the Flex SDK, and not the AVM/playerglobals etc.
> > So Adobe will continue to own the legacy on Flash and it's heart -
> > ActionScript/AVM.
> Adobe will continue to own and control the flash players and the AVM. There will be no requirement for Apache Flex to target the AVM in the long run though if we choose to put the effort into compiling to other targets.
>
> Whilst Adobe will own the specification of ActionScript 3, we will own the mxmlc and falcon compilers. We therefore get to choose what changes we make to the language that Flex is written in. If our changes require us to rename the language to ApacheScript or some such, then so be it.
>
> > I am just thinking past sometime around the period of Flex3,
> > if this same incubation could have done that time, is there a single
> > member in the community could even think of developing Flex4 SDK
> > with spark containers?
> This makes no sense to me. Are you suggesting open source communities couldn't have created spark? I suggest you take a look at the size of some of the other Apache projects, and projects like Linux to get an idea of what the open source community can achieve. Flex 3 to Flex 4 was a small change compared with what many of us are planning for Apache Flex: an interface, composition & DI-based framework written in AS3++ targeting JavaScript and HTML5 no less.
>
> > ... we are restricted to the SDK alone, and has to wait and see Adobe
> > releases for AVM/Flash Player etc.
> Utter nonsense. If Adobe release new versions of the Flash Player that are of benefit to us (multi-threading maybe?), then great, we'll use those new features. If Adobe stopped development of the Flash Player today though, it would make little difference to the amount of development we can do with Flex.
>
> > You see Alex telling ... that a blank interface in AVM consumes around 1K and loads extra 250 bytes to an SWF!
> I laughed when I saw that. Seriously, what is Alex so worried about? With Flex SWFs often weighing in in the megabytes size-frame and the runtime using 100s megabytes, if not gigabytes of RAM, who gives a shit about 250 extra bytes in a SWF!? And again, even if hundreds of extra interfaces causes a problematic size increase for some projects, we will be in control of the compiler. Therefore we could easily develop a tool that, for example, strips many of the interfaces out of Flex in order to create a FlexLite version, with much smaller SWF and runtime memory usage.
>
> > I am a great supporter of Flex, and want Apache Flex to live long!
> Then stop your negative whinging and get working on Apache Flex. Pick something you'd like to do with it, tell us here to see if anyone wants to help you and get coding...
>
> David.
>
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Amit Goel <ag...@gmail.com>.
I beg pardon to disagree David Arno on:
who gives a shit about a 250 extra bytes in a SWF?!
I had times when I was required to produce the reason to my client whenever
my subsequent release build of Flex swf increased by 1K. So that means I
need to clarify my client that 4 interfaces have been added, and that
costed that extra 1K!
I am no pessimistic about Apache Flex, I do see it coming brighter day by
day. Just had few concerns/doubts regarding what Adobe donated to Apache.
Thanks all for making the point clearer.
@Raju Bitter:
Thanks for the details.
--
Amit Goel
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 11:45 PM, David Arno <da...@davidarno.org> wrote:
> >> Whilst Adobe will own the specification of ActionScript 3, we will own
> >> the mxmlc and falcon compilers. We therefore get to choose what
> >> changes we make to the language that Flex is written in. If our
> >> changes require us to rename the language to ApacheScript or some such,
> then so be it.
>
> >Just so there aren't any misconceptions, this isn't entirely true.
>
> In what way isn't what I said 100% true? Who other than Apache Flex
> committers will get to choose what the future of the Flex language is?
>
> > Also, every byte matters. You say "who gives a shit about a 250 extra
> > bytes in a SWF?!". I say this guy and many others. Many people are
> > pushing for a smaller lighter framework, not a bigger one.
>
> Thus my suggestion for FlexLite. Plus Omar's comments about the ridiculous
> size of many Flex components will indeed affect the size and are a far
> better way to reduce size than tolerating shoddy code for perceived size
> gains IMO.
>
> David.
>
>
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 1:17 PM, FRANKLIN GARZON <fg...@hotmail.com>wrote:
> I suggest, keep AVM in Adobe until Apache delivery their first version, so
> we can see the potential of Flex community and contributors to build
> ApacheFlex.So me question is: who has the ability to enable more OS for
> mobile apps? Apache or Adobe? (windows phone is grown to quickly, we need
> into that OS too, what community think?)
We have 0 (zero) control over these requests.
RE: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by FRANKLIN GARZON <fg...@hotmail.com>.
I suggest, keep AVM in Adobe until Apache delivery their first version, so we can see the potential of Flex community and contributors to build ApacheFlex.So me question is: who has the ability to enable more OS for mobile apps? Apache or Adobe? (windows phone is grown to quickly, we need into that OS too, what community think?)
Franklin Garzón
Regional Development Manager
MCTS - MCITP Microsoft SQLServer 2005
*Si el hombre dejara de aprender entonces dejaría de existir*
094496862 / 593-022234585
> From: jonbcampos@gmail.com
> Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 13:10:31 -0600
> Subject: Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
>
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:15 PM, David Arno <da...@davidarno.org> wrote:
>
> > In what way isn't what I said 100% true? Who other than Apache Flex
> > committers will get to choose what the future of the Flex language is?
> >
>
> We have control of the SDK, not the language. The language as part of the
> AVM is still controlled by Adobe. We can use the compiler to "adjust" the
> code as it's compiled to simulate the changes we may be interested in,
> however this code would be much slower than if it was running on the core
> language from the AVM. Ultimately I would recommend against people thinking
> they are going to change the Date object or the floating point value of
> Number or other deep language features.
>
> We've discussed this on forums though so I won't go into it too much more.
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:15 PM, David Arno <da...@davidarno.org> wrote:
> In what way isn't what I said 100% true? Who other than Apache Flex
> committers will get to choose what the future of the Flex language is?
>
We have control of the SDK, not the language. The language as part of the
AVM is still controlled by Adobe. We can use the compiler to "adjust" the
code as it's compiled to simulate the changes we may be interested in,
however this code would be much slower than if it was running on the core
language from the AVM. Ultimately I would recommend against people thinking
they are going to change the Date object or the floating point value of
Number or other deep language features.
We've discussed this on forums though so I won't go into it too much more.
RE: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by David Arno <da...@davidarno.org>.
>> Whilst Adobe will own the specification of ActionScript 3, we will own
>> the mxmlc and falcon compilers. We therefore get to choose what
>> changes we make to the language that Flex is written in. If our
>> changes require us to rename the language to ApacheScript or some such,
then so be it.
>Just so there aren't any misconceptions, this isn't entirely true.
In what way isn't what I said 100% true? Who other than Apache Flex
committers will get to choose what the future of the Flex language is?
> Also, every byte matters. You say "who gives a shit about a 250 extra
> bytes in a SWF?!". I say this guy and many others. Many people are
> pushing for a smaller lighter framework, not a bigger one.
Thus my suggestion for FlexLite. Plus Omar's comments about the ridiculous
size of many Flex components will indeed affect the size and are a far
better way to reduce size than tolerating shoddy code for perceived size
gains IMO.
David.
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com>.
I think the discussion is going on a bit of a tangent - maybe worth
renaming the topic if you want to continue it?
- Peter
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Omar Gonzalez <om...@gmail.com>.
8000 lines of code isn't any better than 16000 when the class drives every
single component that is put on screen. Alex said it best when he said
something along the lines of it being like trying to run fast with really
heavy shoes. I've never written a class over 500 lines of code and felt
good about it. I also understand UIComponent does a lot, but that's exactly
the problem... its just doing way too much.
-Omar
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by jude <fl...@gmail.com>.
I think it should be clarified that a class or function with what we would
determine is a high number of lines of code does not mean that its an
indicator of crap code. If you go by line numbers then anyone who places
the opening brace on the next line will have at least 25% more lines than
someone that doesn't. You would also need to take into account if a class
or function has comments in it. In the case of the UIComponent class I'd
say another 25 to 50% are just that. With those taken into account the line
count might be ~ 8000 (just guessing). Nevertheless, the only way to
measure good code is the number of WTFs per minute.
At home 1k or 1k x 50 to 100 instances of interfaces doesnt matter to me
but on mobile or on a client website or mobile app it helps.
On Sunday, January 15, 2012, Omar Gonzalez <om...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> Also, every byte matters. You say "who gives a shit about a 250 extra
> bytes
>> in a SWF?!". I say this guy and many others. Many people are pushing for
a
>> smaller lighter framework, not a bigger one.
>>
>
> I hear what you're saying, Jon, but honestly, the framework is not going
to
> get any smaller by optimizing interfaces to not take an additional 1k or
> 250 Bytes. The framework will get optimized when we fix the behemoth
> otherwise known as UIComponent. There is no reason any class should have
> 16,000 lines of code. I don't think anyone can argue that's optimal or a
> good code design. So I agree with David Arno,... Who gives a shit about
250
> bytes. I care more about UICOMPONENT being 16000 lines of crap.
>
> -omar
>
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Omar Gonzalez <om...@gmail.com>.
> Also, every byte matters. You say "who gives a shit about a 250 extra
bytes
> in a SWF?!". I say this guy and many others. Many people are pushing for a
> smaller lighter framework, not a bigger one.
>
I hear what you're saying, Jon, but honestly, the framework is not going to
get any smaller by optimizing interfaces to not take an additional 1k or
250 Bytes. The framework will get optimized when we fix the behemoth
otherwise known as UIComponent. There is no reason any class should have
16,000 lines of code. I don't think anyone can argue that's optimal or a
good code design. So I agree with David Arno,... Who gives a shit about 250
bytes. I care more about UICOMPONENT being 16000 lines of crap.
-omar
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Erik Lundgren <er...@lndgrn.se>.
"Flex 3 to Flex 4 was a small change compared with what many of us are planning for Apache Flex: an interface, composition & DI-based framework written in AS3++ targeting JavaScript and HTML5 no less."
Davids comment made me want to hear more! What will people be working on as the project progresses?
I'm not the most realistic guy in the room (and also not a PPMC-member) so I'm not sure if I will be able to help you implement stuff. But I would like to help you sell the vision of A'lex (Apache Flex)!
So tell me!
Are there domain-oriented visions? What do we need for building a great user interface? Why aren't the current tools good enough? Etc.
Are there implementation-oriented visions? How to pick up speed? How to deploy to the browser? What about desktop software written in Java, Scala, C++, C#? What about Windows Mobile? Etc.
If this is the wrong time for this dissuasion – just ignore it! ;) Just interested. And excited. :)
/E.
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 10:01 AM, David Arno <da...@davidarno.org> wrote:
> Whilst Adobe will own the specification of ActionScript 3, we will own the
> mxmlc and falcon compilers. We therefore get to choose what changes we make
> to the language that Flex is written in. If our changes require us to
> rename the language to ApacheScript or some such, then so be it.
Just so there aren't any misconceptions, this isn't entirely true.
Also, every byte matters. You say "who gives a shit about a 250 extra bytes
in a SWF?!". I say this guy and many others. Many people are pushing for a
smaller lighter framework, not a bigger one.
RE: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by David Arno <da...@davidarno.org>.
From: Amit Goel [mailto:agoel.khs@gmail.com]
Sent: 15 January 2012 06:41
> Adobe will be donating the Flex SDK, and not the AVM/playerglobals etc.
> So Adobe will continue to own the legacy on Flash and it's heart -
> ActionScript/AVM.
Adobe will continue to own and control the flash players and the AVM. There will be no requirement for Apache Flex to target the AVM in the long run though if we choose to put the effort into compiling to other targets.
Whilst Adobe will own the specification of ActionScript 3, we will own the mxmlc and falcon compilers. We therefore get to choose what changes we make to the language that Flex is written in. If our changes require us to rename the language to ApacheScript or some such, then so be it.
> I am just thinking past sometime around the period of Flex3,
> if this same incubation could have done that time, is there a single
> member in the community could even think of developing Flex4 SDK
> with spark containers?
This makes no sense to me. Are you suggesting open source communities couldn't have created spark? I suggest you take a look at the size of some of the other Apache projects, and projects like Linux to get an idea of what the open source community can achieve. Flex 3 to Flex 4 was a small change compared with what many of us are planning for Apache Flex: an interface, composition & DI-based framework written in AS3++ targeting JavaScript and HTML5 no less.
> ... we are restricted to the SDK alone, and has to wait and see Adobe
> releases for AVM/Flash Player etc.
Utter nonsense. If Adobe release new versions of the Flash Player that are of benefit to us (multi-threading maybe?), then great, we'll use those new features. If Adobe stopped development of the Flash Player today though, it would make little difference to the amount of development we can do with Flex.
> You see Alex telling ... that a blank interface in AVM consumes around 1K and loads extra 250 bytes to an SWF!
I laughed when I saw that. Seriously, what is Alex so worried about? With Flex SWFs often weighing in in the megabytes size-frame and the runtime using 100s megabytes, if not gigabytes of RAM, who gives a shit about 250 extra bytes in a SWF!? And again, even if hundreds of extra interfaces causes a problematic size increase for some projects, we will be in control of the compiler. Therefore we could easily develop a tool that, for example, strips many of the interfaces out of Flex in order to create a FlexLite version, with much smaller SWF and runtime memory usage.
> I am a great supporter of Flex, and want Apache Flex to live long!
Then stop your negative whinging and get working on Apache Flex. Pick something you'd like to do with it, tell us here to see if anyone wants to help you and get coding...
David.
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Omar Gonzalez <om...@gmail.com>.
Yea, so Adobe legal is finishing up review before we receive SDK code and
then the sky (or AVM) is the limit, at least until the community visualizes
and realizes new capabilities for the SDK, such as the cross compiling to
JavaScript that have already been discussed once the FalconJS bits are
donated.
With all due respect, if you're a strong Flex supporter like you state in
your email keep watching this list, contribute via patches, opinions and
ideas and the community will move this project forward. Of that I am
absolutely sure. Just have a little patience, we've waited years for Flex
to be truly open source, a week or two of delay from Adobe Legal isn't
going to kill this project, or this community.
-omar
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Raju Bitter <ra...@googlemail.com>.
Amit,
I've voiced my concerns around the runtime a few times, both in the
incubator mailing lists, and in this mailing list.
http://old.nabble.com/-PROPOSAL--Flex-for-Apache-Incubator-to33005429.html#a33012665
http://markmail.org/search/?q=+list%3Aorg.apache.incubator.flex-dev+avm
Roy Fielding said in his presention at the Flex Summit
(http://tv.adobe.com/watch/flex-community-summit-december-2011/what-it-means-to-be-an-apache-project-part-2/)
that he considers the JVM just as proprietary as the Adobe AVM. Apache
didn't have a good experience with Oracle/Sun and the Apache Harmony
project, which probably explains his feelings towards the JVM. But I
have to disagree. The advantage of the JVM is that you have a large
number of companies building JVMs, for both desktops, servers and
mobile.
But back to Flex and the ASF: It seems that Apache Flex is mainly
focused on working on the Apache Flex framework, and does want to
leave a discussion around the single-vendor dependence of Apache Flex
out. That's a community decision, and the motivation is probably that
most people working on the project
a) want a future for Flex,
b) want to see something positive happening quickly (first Apache Flex release),
b) have products depending on Flex, and the current setup of Apache
Flex is still much better form them than the situation in late 2011.
Roy Fielding said as well, that the "Main benefit of open source is
independence of any particular vendor". That doesn't fit in well with
Apache Flex, since there's a lot of project dependency on a single
vendor - in my eyes. My idea was to define a high-level goal of an
alternative runtime for the project, but that's not how Apache
projects work: No roadmap, no high-level goals. I'd say that's a
limitation of what you can do within an ASF project, since it will be
relatively difficult to "plan" a product with this approach, but
without this approach there might be roadmaps and plans, but nothing
gets done.
Read the first paragraph on the page describing the ASF:
http://www.apache.org/foundation/
"The Apache Software Foundation provides organizational, legal, and
financial support for a broad range of open source software projects.
The Foundation provides an established framework for intellectual
property and financial contributions that simultaneously limits
contributors potential legal exposure. Through a collaborative and
meritocratic development process, Apache projects deliver
enterprise-grade, freely available software products that attract
large communities of users. The pragmatic Apache License makes it easy
for all users, commercial and individual, to deploy Apache products."
Nothing is being said about open standards, and that the software
created through ASF should only support open runtime environments. ASF
makes sure that a company cannot influence a project DIRECTLY by
having a group of employees control an ASF project, based on what Roy
Fielding said. And if the ASF board does not oppose the influence
Adobe has on Flex by the dependency on Flash Player and ActionScript
(something the community cannot vote on), it's ASF's decision.
As a community member, you can either accept the current situation and
support Apache Flex, or decide you don't like the setup and not do it.
- Raju
At the same time I sympathize with all developers wiling to make
something happen for Apache Flex, and hope that the vendor dependency
Flex has can be resolved at some time in the future.
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Amit Goel <ag...@gmail.com>.
Could you pls provide me link where this runtime has been discussed? I am
sorry I missed that, probably I was not subscribed to this list that time.
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have full faith on Apache Flex, but not on Adobe any more!
>
>
> I don't really get the point of this thread, if you're talking about
> runtime dependency its been discussed at great length - we're here to move
> the Flex SDK forward not to bash Adobe.
>
> Regardless of your opinion about Adobe, their strategy and commitment -
> this in my honest opinion is not the forum for rants, nor does it do
> anything to do anything to help us establish Apache Flex as an independent
> and open source project.
>
> - Peter
>
--
Thanks,
Amit Goel
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Peter Elst <pe...@gmail.com>.
> I have full faith on Apache Flex, but not on Adobe any more!
I don't really get the point of this thread, if you're talking about
runtime dependency its been discussed at great length - we're here to move
the Flex SDK forward not to bash Adobe.
Regardless of your opinion about Adobe, their strategy and commitment -
this in my honest opinion is not the forum for rants, nor does it do
anything to do anything to help us establish Apache Flex as an independent
and open source project.
- Peter
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Amit Goel <ag...@gmail.com>.
I have full faith on Apache Flex, but not on Adobe any more!
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Amit Goel <ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well I think there might be other words to say it, but Adobe has to do
> that.
>
> @Omar:
> Sure we all need to stay positive about it. Apache Flex community will
> take the Flex SDK forward, and the time is gonna tell that.
> Long Live Apache Flex!
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Amit Goel
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/14/12 11:54 PM, "Amit Goel" <ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I believe that point of going opensource is just that Adobe wants to get
>> > rid of it.
>> Hmm. Not sure what you mean by that, but there is probably a cheaper way
>> to
>> "get rid" of Flex than to pay me and others to continue to work on it.
>>
>> > No body needs any approval of those giants, but as the web standards
>> rely
>> > heavily on them, Apache Flex will definitely be befitted these majors
>> adopt
>> > opensource Flex.
>> Again, the Apache version of Flex does not need to become a web standard
>> to
>> be successful.
>>
>> --
>> Alex Harui
>> Flex SDK Team
>> Adobe Systems, Inc.
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>>
>>
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Amit Goel <ag...@gmail.com>.
Well I think there might be other words to say it, but Adobe has to do that.
@Omar:
Sure we all need to stay positive about it. Apache Flex community will take
the Flex SDK forward, and the time is gonna tell that.
Long Live Apache Flex!
--
Thanks,
Amit Goel
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/14/12 11:54 PM, "Amit Goel" <ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I believe that point of going opensource is just that Adobe wants to get
> > rid of it.
> Hmm. Not sure what you mean by that, but there is probably a cheaper way
> to
> "get rid" of Flex than to pay me and others to continue to work on it.
>
> > No body needs any approval of those giants, but as the web standards rely
> > heavily on them, Apache Flex will definitely be befitted these majors
> adopt
> > opensource Flex.
> Again, the Apache version of Flex does not need to become a web standard to
> be successful.
>
> --
> Alex Harui
> Flex SDK Team
> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>
>
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Omar Gonzalez <om...@gmail.com>.
I can't tell if Amit is a strong Flex supporter (as stated in his email) or
if Amit thinks it is a lame SDK (as stated in his email). Either way, the
Apache Flex community will decide what the future of Flex will become, and
I have a strong feeling it will be with or without the AVM. Either way it
is too soon to tell.
Instead, I'd challenge you, Amit, to stay positive and then there would be
no doubt that you truly are in support of us, the Apache Flex community, in
these first steps of our journey to move the Flex SDK forward.
-omar
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/14/12 11:54 PM, "Amit Goel" <ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe that point of going opensource is just that Adobe wants to get
> rid of it.
Hmm. Not sure what you mean by that, but there is probably a cheaper way to
"get rid" of Flex than to pay me and others to continue to work on it.
> No body needs any approval of those giants, but as the web standards rely
> heavily on them, Apache Flex will definitely be befitted these majors adopt
> opensource Flex.
Again, the Apache version of Flex does not need to become a web standard to
be successful.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Amit Goel <ag...@gmail.com>.
Alex,
Sure spark didn't leverage anything on that, what I mean here is an example
of what could be think of with just having a lame SDK on community's hand,
when other dependencies are owned by Adobe. And by that 'interface'
example, I was citing an example of same limitation community is having,
there might be several other such concerns and this is just an example of
that.
Everyone will be waiting eagerly for new ideas community will be bringing
out and I am excited about more people joining the project.
I believe that point of going opensource is just that Adobe wants to get
rid of it.
No body needs any approval of those giants, but as the web standards rely
heavily on them, Apache Flex will definitely be befitted these majors adopt
opensource Flex.
And last but not the least support doesn't lay on words said or mails
written, it lays on actual actions, which Adobe has already done by
donating the sdk, and you and the rest of community is doing by taking it
further.
--
Thanks,
Amit Goel
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/14/12 10:41 PM, "Amit Goel" <ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Adobe will be donating the Flex SDK, and not the AVM/playerglobals etc.
> So
> > Adobe will continue to own the legacy on Flash and it's heart -
> > ActionScript/AVM. I am just thinking past sometime around the period of
> > Flex3, if this same incubation could have done that time, is there a
> single
> > member in the community could even think of developing Flex4 SDK with
> spark
> > containers? I believe NO.
> Spark did not leverage any VM enhancements to my knowledge.
>
> > The community is just here to develop some more components on top of the
> > SDK components - that's it?
> I don't think that's it. Lots of new ideas will be explored.
>
> > But why no AVM and other legacy without which community is real lame
> > with having a restricted scope, in which they are to just maintain the
> Flex
> > evolution?
> Every Java project in Apache does not include the JVM. ActionScript
> projects don't need to include the AVM.
>
> > But what I see is that scope available for the community seems to be very
> > restricted, where there is a huge dependency on its original legacy
> holder
> > i.e. Adobe itself.
> The scope available is already able to create world-class enterprise
> applications. That seems to be good enough for the folks joining this
> project.
>
> >
> > You see Alex telling
> > here<
> http://markmail.org/search/?q=Flex%20modularity%20through%20composition%2
> >
> 0and%20interfaces#query:Flex%20modularity%20through%20composition%20and%20inte
> > rfaces+page:1+mid:c274z4qt3e74ri3b+state:results>,
> > that a blank interface in AVM consumes around 1K and loads extra 250
> bytes
> > to an SWF! What are the ways we can reduce it? Its absolutely - No Way
> > around, until Adobe itself comes up with some changes to AVM.
> True, but I don't think we need to reduce that to be successful.
>
>
> > Ok we have jira
> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX>now hosted with Apache for
> > Flex, we will continue logging SDKs bug which were initially done on
> > Adobe's site <http://bugs.adobe.com/flex/>.
> We plan to migrate Adobe Flex SDK bugs to Apache, so please do not re-file
> issues filed with Adobe.
>
> > And YES, Adobe will make some
> > charity(if at all possible) sometime by fixing some of the bugs logged
> > there via their SDK team. I am saying that becoz Adobe already was lazy
> > fixing bugs logged under their banner <http://bugs.adobe.com/flex/>.
> The point of going opensource is now the project members can fix bugs and
> Adobe has no say of which ones to fix.
> >
> > It reminds me of Steve Jobs criticizing Adobe which created havoc over
> > Flash/Flex community. I believe this Apache Flex could only be opensource
> > when community is free to develop the SDK, own the legacy without any
> > limitations. With this incubation, I was feeling a fresh air of Flex
> being
> > opensourced and other major vendors Apple/Google/MicroSoft will adopt it
> as
> > a standard, but this is not going to happen anymore, when its creator
> > itself is taking its hand back on this.
> >
> > I am a great supporter of Flex, and want Apache Flex to live long!
> Hmm, didn't see much support in your email, and I think your goals are too
> lofty. This project can be successful without becoming a standard approved
> by Apple/Google/Microsoft.
>
> --
> Alex Harui
> Flex SDK Team
> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>
>
Re: Flex incubation on Apache as Opensource
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/14/12 10:41 PM, "Amit Goel" <ag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Adobe will be donating the Flex SDK, and not the AVM/playerglobals etc. So
> Adobe will continue to own the legacy on Flash and it's heart -
> ActionScript/AVM. I am just thinking past sometime around the period of
> Flex3, if this same incubation could have done that time, is there a single
> member in the community could even think of developing Flex4 SDK with spark
> containers? I believe NO.
Spark did not leverage any VM enhancements to my knowledge.
> The community is just here to develop some more components on top of the
> SDK components - that's it?
I don't think that's it. Lots of new ideas will be explored.
> But why no AVM and other legacy without which community is real lame
> with having a restricted scope, in which they are to just maintain the Flex
> evolution?
Every Java project in Apache does not include the JVM. ActionScript
projects don't need to include the AVM.
> But what I see is that scope available for the community seems to be very
> restricted, where there is a huge dependency on its original legacy holder
> i.e. Adobe itself.
The scope available is already able to create world-class enterprise
applications. That seems to be good enough for the folks joining this
project.
>
> You see Alex telling
> here<http://markmail.org/search/?q=Flex%20modularity%20through%20composition%2
> 0and%20interfaces#query:Flex%20modularity%20through%20composition%20and%20inte
> rfaces+page:1+mid:c274z4qt3e74ri3b+state:results>,
> that a blank interface in AVM consumes around 1K and loads extra 250 bytes
> to an SWF! What are the ways we can reduce it? Its absolutely - No Way
> around, until Adobe itself comes up with some changes to AVM.
True, but I don't think we need to reduce that to be successful.
> Ok we have jira
> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX>now hosted with Apache for
> Flex, we will continue logging SDKs bug which were initially done on
> Adobe's site <http://bugs.adobe.com/flex/>.
We plan to migrate Adobe Flex SDK bugs to Apache, so please do not re-file
issues filed with Adobe.
> And YES, Adobe will make some
> charity(if at all possible) sometime by fixing some of the bugs logged
> there via their SDK team. I am saying that becoz Adobe already was lazy
> fixing bugs logged under their banner <http://bugs.adobe.com/flex/>.
The point of going opensource is now the project members can fix bugs and
Adobe has no say of which ones to fix.
>
> It reminds me of Steve Jobs criticizing Adobe which created havoc over
> Flash/Flex community. I believe this Apache Flex could only be opensource
> when community is free to develop the SDK, own the legacy without any
> limitations. With this incubation, I was feeling a fresh air of Flex being
> opensourced and other major vendors Apple/Google/MicroSoft will adopt it as
> a standard, but this is not going to happen anymore, when its creator
> itself is taking its hand back on this.
>
> I am a great supporter of Flex, and want Apache Flex to live long!
Hmm, didn't see much support in your email, and I think your goals are too
lofty. This project can be successful without becoming a standard approved
by Apple/Google/Microsoft.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui