You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@royale.apache.org by Peter Ent <pe...@adobe.com.INVALID> on 2018/04/22 16:37:26 UTC
Royale Foundation and More
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://github.com/pentapache/royale-foundation
[2] Apache Royale Foundation Wiki (in the Repo):
https://github.com/pentapache/royale-foundation/wiki
Regards,
Peter Ent
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Peter,
as Piotr says is sad news, but I want to be positive, and hope that you
could continue connected to Apache Royale and contributing whenever
possible. I think you contributions are key to this project and as well I
think we are this days getting many important milestones.
I believe blindly that this project can be differentiating for the web and
be the next generation of current trends, so I see no better change than
staying ;)
If that can be possible, at least I want to wish you the best in your new
journey.
Thanks for all done and...fight to stay with us!! :))
Carlos
2018-04-22 18:49 GMT+02:00 Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Peter,
>
> This is definitely sad news and a big loss to that project if it happened.
> However I understand fully that sometimes we just need to start something
> new and even totally different.
>
> Thank you very much for your notes and that repository - It is something
> which I will add to the list to look!
>
> All The Best!
> Piotr
>
> 2018-04-22 18:37 GMT+02:00 Peter Ent <pe...@adobe.com.invalid>:
>
> > 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://github.com/pentapache/royale-foundation
> >
> > [2] Apache Royale Foundation Wiki (in the Repo):
> > https://github.com/pentapache/royale-foundation/wiki
> >
> > Regards,
> > Peter Ent
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>.
Hi Peter,
This is definitely sad news and a big loss to that project if it happened.
However I understand fully that sometimes we just need to start something
new and even totally different.
Thank you very much for your notes and that repository - It is something
which I will add to the list to look!
All The Best!
Piotr
2018-04-22 18:37 GMT+02:00 Peter Ent <pe...@adobe.com.invalid>:
> 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://github.com/pentapache/royale-foundation
>
> [2] Apache Royale Foundation Wiki (in the Repo):
> https://github.com/pentapache/royale-foundation/wiki
>
> Regards,
> Peter Ent
>
>
--
Piotr Zarzycki
Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
<https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>.
Carlos,
That's wonderful news! I'm happy that has happened! :)
On Tue, Apr 24, 2018, 11:56 PM Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> my thoughts on this are various: My perspective of Adobe as a company
> passed from a company that I love so much thanks to many products, and many
> actions done in the past years (I think it coincides with "product managers
> become CEOs of the tech company" and that is noticed in directions taken
> with the technology and products)....to a company I hate so much, and even
> removed the need to use any product that comes from Adobe, thanks to the
> sum of movements (and not movements) in most all business Adobe did in the
> past 8 years or so (maybe coinciding with "sales managers becoming CEOs of
> a tech company", in concrete, of course, regarding to flash and flex, but
> not only that as you or others could expect.
>
> Begin said that, my perspective has started to shift in the past months,
> thanks to this concrete donation of the work of Peter and you. But, my
> feeling about this is that we are reaching a good point, we are near, but
> still are not there. So removing Peter and you now, will be like to run a
> race just to stay a few meters from the finish line. I think community
> perspective will be bad if Adobe do that. Probably #flash2020, and Apache
> Royale 1.0 would be an inflection point since is where all the work done,
> people planning migration will. That's my vision if like you say Adobe want
> people turns the bad feelings generated in the last years with all the
> unfortunate movements. Start removing resources at 0.9.2 and 1'5 years
> before the burst of the bomb doesn't seem the best strategy to do now for
> Adobe (just IMHO).
>
> In the other hand. I must to say that my company (Codeoscopic) is ok to
> migrate to Royale its main product. We're preparing the scenario to make
> that happen, but the decision is already taken. I emailed some days ago
> about this. So you can count another company in the process :). I think
> this can be forwarded to your management team, that another company is
> depending on the work you and Peter make this years, but in the work you
> still need to do to make Royale a usable technology or what the same:
> version 1.0.
>
> Begin said that, things like className discussion has been crucial in the
> process, I think that's a little stone in the road, and my perception is
> that in this list there's great minds in the development field, coding,
> languages, servers, and so on... but although I share part of that
> background, my needs, and the needs of many other people out there are as
> well focused on design, art, ux, design software... and many other visual
> things...and the way we manage styles in Royale was for me not capable
> and/or acceptable of doing what people needs. The proof is that I had many
> problems coding MDL (and we discussed at that time), and the same happened
> with Jewel (and again we had to lost many emails in this topic)... I always
> hit the same wall. And we need to discuss many emails to give lots of data
> and argumentation to try to make you and others understand the
> problems...problems that exists for people trying to "style" or "paint" the
> things previously coded in Royale, and now that are hopefully solved, I can
> continue coding Jewel more quickly. And all of this ends in a UI set that
> finally is more visual, and that people could start to use as a flex
> replacement, since I firmly believe that the visuals can make other come to
> us, and without this problem solved (class name coding) and many others we
> solved the last months (CSS mainly), Royale was not ready for get visual
> things and that was a huge problem. For me more important that emulation
> components (that I'll be referring more later...).
>
> So, for migrating out system, I need:
>
> * To have a minimun Jewel component set (for this, I still need to make
> DateField, DateChooser, Autocomplete, and maybe a couple more components,
> maybe Card?) - so this point is at +-70%
> * Layouts. (I need to revise Jewel Layouts and make more robust, and maybe
> use flex-box consistently though all of it ) - % difficult to say now
> * Have RemoteObject/AMF : Maybe 100% complete but still need to try more
> types of data communication
> * Start a "Initial-POC" with my system that makes a login and get some
> initial data with AMF. (0%, but this days I put some company pieces aligned
> and I'm ready to start this)
> I need to present this to the managers and responsible of the actual
> system. Hope this could happen in the next 1-3 weeks.
>
> If "Initial-POC" works right, I think we'll have all needed to start
> building a Royale client for our system. So this could happen in 1 month
> from now depending of things needed.
> Things I still didn't fight and I think are important are: Validators and
> Formatters and Injection Framework (We use Swiz Framework), and still I
> need to know if we can have something like Swiz in Royale (metadata,
> injection,...). I assume this is possible.
>
> Another point I need to check are emulation components, I'll be checking in
> some days, maybe post 0.9.3 release, and see how that could fit in our
> migration strategy. For now, and since our Flex client is heavily relying
> on Swiz Framework, for now seems that we have a path of "recreating the
> client" from scratch, instead of emulate it and then change it...maybe we
> are still a month behind to see this last part...
>
> ...but the first points are very clear to me.
>
> That's my vision on all of this explained with total sincerity. Hope that
> helps, although I'm only one in hundreds or thousand of others out there...
>
> So for now, want to thank Adobe the donation of you and Peter's work, and
> hope that could continue as we reach some important milestones ahead so
> community could see Adobe again as we saw it before 2010. For me that point
> is more in #flash2020 time point.
>
> Thanks
>
> Carlos
>
>
> 2018-04-24 18:16 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>:
>
> > This is not an official Adobe statement, just my personal opinion. Adobe
> > is not "investing" in Apache Royale. Adobe is "generously donating
> > resources". Probably well past one million dollars so far. An
> investment
> > usually has an expected payback. A charitable donation does not. Adobe
> is
> > unlikely to try to build a business around Royale.
> >
> > So the factors that affect Peter's assignment on Royale and my assignment
> > on Royale have nothing to do with "if Adobe spends a bit more they will
> > make more money". It is simply, "how much do we (Adobe) want to spend on
> > goodwill". Those of you who personally give to charities probably have
> > some way of evaluating which charities to give to. Adobe is in the same
> > situation in terms of donating resources to open source projects at
> Apache
> > and elsewhere. It has to make sense to them from a "what do our
> customers
> > think of our company" perspective.
> >
> > If some major Adobe customers decided to use Royale, that would make it
> > more important to Adobe to make sure they are successful. But we have
> not
> > done that so far. Instead we spend our time rewriting how we manage
> > classNames, nitpicking about licensing, and discussing lots of other
> things
> > when I would much rather we prove that we can help a second customer
> > migrate. And then a third customer. I believe if we had already somehow
> > attracted that third customer and they were an important Adobe customer,
> > Peter would not have been re-assigned.
> >
> > This is Apache, so you can scratch any itch you want, but when I do any
> > work on Royale, my eyes are always on how I can keep convincing my
> > management to keep donating, not keep investing. And my management cares
> > little about the internals and much more about who our users are.
> >
> > My 2 cents,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 4/24/18, 7:59 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
> > Rovira" <carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrovira@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash
> Player
> > will
> > be removed from Browsers.
> > So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache Royale.
> Both
> > users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and
> Royale
> > becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I
> envision
> > Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React that
> > this
> > years have been the "middle step" to something like we are creating
> > here.
> > So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since I
> > truly
> > think we can make a difference
> >
> > C.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
> >
> > > Hi Peter,
> > >
> > > >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...
> > >
> > > Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann
> > Hesse,
> > > German poem) ;-)
> > > However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to
> > convince
> > > Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
> > > My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
> > > Announcement", we have much more attention.
> > > And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has
> > to be
> > > migrated.
> > > So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want
> to
> > > continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex
> > apps with
> > > as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
> > >
> > > I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
> > >
> > > Thank you for all that work, Peter!
> > > Olaf
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.
> > com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3
> > fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> > 7C636601787726789792&sdata=2ZNZcdyDt9go76qv6%2FtjuMQ0oxojJdlJW1vpqgof1yU%
> > 3D&reserved=0
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> > 7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> > cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=3i%2B%2FtdQ%
> > 2BIFTA0xDCTZTuW6OQBhh0AbDpRA8ObSnwLEM%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Alex,
my thoughts on this are various: My perspective of Adobe as a company
passed from a company that I love so much thanks to many products, and many
actions done in the past years (I think it coincides with "product managers
become CEOs of the tech company" and that is noticed in directions taken
with the technology and products)....to a company I hate so much, and even
removed the need to use any product that comes from Adobe, thanks to the
sum of movements (and not movements) in most all business Adobe did in the
past 8 years or so (maybe coinciding with "sales managers becoming CEOs of
a tech company", in concrete, of course, regarding to flash and flex, but
not only that as you or others could expect.
Begin said that, my perspective has started to shift in the past months,
thanks to this concrete donation of the work of Peter and you. But, my
feeling about this is that we are reaching a good point, we are near, but
still are not there. So removing Peter and you now, will be like to run a
race just to stay a few meters from the finish line. I think community
perspective will be bad if Adobe do that. Probably #flash2020, and Apache
Royale 1.0 would be an inflection point since is where all the work done,
people planning migration will. That's my vision if like you say Adobe want
people turns the bad feelings generated in the last years with all the
unfortunate movements. Start removing resources at 0.9.2 and 1'5 years
before the burst of the bomb doesn't seem the best strategy to do now for
Adobe (just IMHO).
In the other hand. I must to say that my company (Codeoscopic) is ok to
migrate to Royale its main product. We're preparing the scenario to make
that happen, but the decision is already taken. I emailed some days ago
about this. So you can count another company in the process :). I think
this can be forwarded to your management team, that another company is
depending on the work you and Peter make this years, but in the work you
still need to do to make Royale a usable technology or what the same:
version 1.0.
Begin said that, things like className discussion has been crucial in the
process, I think that's a little stone in the road, and my perception is
that in this list there's great minds in the development field, coding,
languages, servers, and so on... but although I share part of that
background, my needs, and the needs of many other people out there are as
well focused on design, art, ux, design software... and many other visual
things...and the way we manage styles in Royale was for me not capable
and/or acceptable of doing what people needs. The proof is that I had many
problems coding MDL (and we discussed at that time), and the same happened
with Jewel (and again we had to lost many emails in this topic)... I always
hit the same wall. And we need to discuss many emails to give lots of data
and argumentation to try to make you and others understand the
problems...problems that exists for people trying to "style" or "paint" the
things previously coded in Royale, and now that are hopefully solved, I can
continue coding Jewel more quickly. And all of this ends in a UI set that
finally is more visual, and that people could start to use as a flex
replacement, since I firmly believe that the visuals can make other come to
us, and without this problem solved (class name coding) and many others we
solved the last months (CSS mainly), Royale was not ready for get visual
things and that was a huge problem. For me more important that emulation
components (that I'll be referring more later...).
So, for migrating out system, I need:
* To have a minimun Jewel component set (for this, I still need to make
DateField, DateChooser, Autocomplete, and maybe a couple more components,
maybe Card?) - so this point is at +-70%
* Layouts. (I need to revise Jewel Layouts and make more robust, and maybe
use flex-box consistently though all of it ) - % difficult to say now
* Have RemoteObject/AMF : Maybe 100% complete but still need to try more
types of data communication
* Start a "Initial-POC" with my system that makes a login and get some
initial data with AMF. (0%, but this days I put some company pieces aligned
and I'm ready to start this)
I need to present this to the managers and responsible of the actual
system. Hope this could happen in the next 1-3 weeks.
If "Initial-POC" works right, I think we'll have all needed to start
building a Royale client for our system. So this could happen in 1 month
from now depending of things needed.
Things I still didn't fight and I think are important are: Validators and
Formatters and Injection Framework (We use Swiz Framework), and still I
need to know if we can have something like Swiz in Royale (metadata,
injection,...). I assume this is possible.
Another point I need to check are emulation components, I'll be checking in
some days, maybe post 0.9.3 release, and see how that could fit in our
migration strategy. For now, and since our Flex client is heavily relying
on Swiz Framework, for now seems that we have a path of "recreating the
client" from scratch, instead of emulate it and then change it...maybe we
are still a month behind to see this last part...
...but the first points are very clear to me.
That's my vision on all of this explained with total sincerity. Hope that
helps, although I'm only one in hundreds or thousand of others out there...
So for now, want to thank Adobe the donation of you and Peter's work, and
hope that could continue as we reach some important milestones ahead so
community could see Adobe again as we saw it before 2010. For me that point
is more in #flash2020 time point.
Thanks
Carlos
2018-04-24 18:16 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>:
> This is not an official Adobe statement, just my personal opinion. Adobe
> is not "investing" in Apache Royale. Adobe is "generously donating
> resources". Probably well past one million dollars so far. An investment
> usually has an expected payback. A charitable donation does not. Adobe is
> unlikely to try to build a business around Royale.
>
> So the factors that affect Peter's assignment on Royale and my assignment
> on Royale have nothing to do with "if Adobe spends a bit more they will
> make more money". It is simply, "how much do we (Adobe) want to spend on
> goodwill". Those of you who personally give to charities probably have
> some way of evaluating which charities to give to. Adobe is in the same
> situation in terms of donating resources to open source projects at Apache
> and elsewhere. It has to make sense to them from a "what do our customers
> think of our company" perspective.
>
> If some major Adobe customers decided to use Royale, that would make it
> more important to Adobe to make sure they are successful. But we have not
> done that so far. Instead we spend our time rewriting how we manage
> classNames, nitpicking about licensing, and discussing lots of other things
> when I would much rather we prove that we can help a second customer
> migrate. And then a third customer. I believe if we had already somehow
> attracted that third customer and they were an important Adobe customer,
> Peter would not have been re-assigned.
>
> This is Apache, so you can scratch any itch you want, but when I do any
> work on Royale, my eyes are always on how I can keep convincing my
> management to keep donating, not keep investing. And my management cares
> little about the internals and much more about who our users are.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 4/24/18, 7:59 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
> Rovira" <carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrovira@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash Player
> will
> be removed from Browsers.
> So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache Royale. Both
> users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and Royale
> becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I envision
> Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React that
> this
> years have been the "middle step" to something like we are creating
> here.
> So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since I
> truly
> think we can make a difference
>
> C.
>
>
>
> 2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
>
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > >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...
> >
> > Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann
> Hesse,
> > German poem) ;-)
> > However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to
> convince
> > Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
> > My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
> > Announcement", we have much more attention.
> > And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has
> to be
> > migrated.
> > So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want to
> > continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex
> apps with
> > as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
> >
> > I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
> >
> > Thank you for all that work, Peter!
> > Olaf
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.
> com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3
> fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636601787726789792&sdata=2ZNZcdyDt9go76qv6%2FtjuMQ0oxojJdlJW1vpqgof1yU%
> 3D&reserved=0
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=3i%2B%2FtdQ%
> 2BIFTA0xDCTZTuW6OQBhh0AbDpRA8ObSnwLEM%3D&reserved=0
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Alex,
2018-04-25 20:12 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>:
>
> Adobe does not seem interested in application developers outside of
> Cordova/PhoneGap. So we've spent some time making sure Royale can output
> Cordova apps, but I haven't found a way to promote that inside or outside
> of Adobe yet.
I want to try Apache Cordova soon, so I hope that as put my hands on it
then I can post on website and/or cover it on social networks.
Nowadays all people making apps are thinking not only on desktop but as
well on mobile, so all of this in the end should add Cordova as part of the
equation.
And we should complement mobile with responsive layouts (is in my plan for
Jewel layouts to make it CSS responsive), and see how things should take
care in controls (for example Button or TextInput works directly, but
DateField will need to have different representations one for desktop
(mouse), and other for mobile (spinner-touch)).
> Adobe is interested in building its web presence around the Cloud. That's
> why I wish I had time to create royale.a.o in Royale so we could try to
> show how we can do the job as well as, or better than, say, React or other
> JS frameworks.
Right, your intention to expose that we can do that has a problem, that to
make a "product" that will be sell you will need to handle carefully the
visuals, since the opposite will end on showing something that maybe could
damage more that help. We know (here) that we can make a website with
Royale. It will be work, but can be done. But for managers, they don't see
code internals, the first thing they'll see is the final look and feel, and
only with something really cool, you'll attract interest, then that people
will see internal code, and will see how cool is that. So for me that
implies lots of more effort to be done. For example, I think one thing
possible now is to put work on ASDoc visuals to make it look good (I want
to do that as well), and that is something more realistic in terms of
work/time/results.
> I'm not sure there are many important Flex apps left at Adobe. Two of
> biggest ones I know of have been replaced instead of migrated. But if we
> could demonstrate to Adobe that it could save time developing its web
> presence in Royale or have fewer bugs, then we've aligned with that goal.
>
> I was surprised that the Flash 2020 announcement didn't generate more
> interest in FlexJS/Royale. I was hoping that at least one major Adobe
> customer would speak up and say that they still had a lot of Flex apps to
> migrate and were interested in Royale, but that didn't happen. It is
> interesting to note that you know of customers that are still on Flex and
> we still see signs of that on the mailing lists from time to time. My
> question is: what are these folks planning to do with their Flex apps?
> There are some 600 people on dev@flex, 400 on users@flex, 70 on
> dev@royale, 50 on users@royale, and about 200 folks following Royale on
> twitter. Are any of them major Adobe customers? Or do the rest
> collectively form a major impact on Adobe? I only see a few big-name
> company domains for folks subscribing to the Flex lists and they have not
> yet subscribed to Royale lists. So what are the big companies that had big
> Flex apps doing? Have they already migrated everything off of Flex/Flash?
> Like I said above, Adobe is doing so without using Royale. Or did they not
> understand what's going to happen in 2020? If they were betting on
> FlexJS/Royale, then they should speak up about Adobe reducing resources on
> Royale.
>
I think this deserves more time that I have right now (I'll be a bit off
for the next 3-4 days), but shortly, I think companies are :
a) going to Angular, React...options and I hope we could show that Royale
is a better option as the next step to choose ( so they use Flex, then
React (for example) and now they should go with Royale as a technology of
the future)
b) they are still stuck in Flex since don't have resources to change
anything since the change is not easy at all.
So our mission should be continue making the technology capable of
migrating and in parallel make it "pretty" so we can attract eyes and they
can say: "hey! with royale we have a technology capable of doing things and
as well looks sufficient for producction apps!". One without the other
should result in a fail.
>
> One piece of feedback I heard from a major Adobe customer was that
> FlexJS/Royale did not have 24/7 support. There was no phone number to call
> when things break and no executives to escalate to if support was not
> satisfactory. Having a company with a good track record pick up support
> for Royale would probably have a huge impact for enterprises who are
> sitting on Flex apps. If there are any.
>
>
That should be made from companies out there, we could contact companies
and expose that they can sell that service and that could make a business
line from that support.
> Maybe we should send a "Hey do you still have Flex apps, what are you
> going to do about them?" on dev@flex and users@flex. In the meantime,
> can you tell us what your customers are planning to do? Do they understand
> what is going to happen in 2020? If you are reading this email and have a
> Flex app, please speak up about what your plans are.
>
I'm working towards having things to show to that clients. When I have it,
I'll make some meetings and then will have the feedback, for now I can say
too much about it yet.
I hope to be a month or so from that.
Thanks
Carlos
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
>
> On 4/24/18, 10:38 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Carlos,
>
> That would be great :)
>
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, 12:00 AM Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > That's so real David,
> >
> > we know lots of clients that still are in Flex, and I'm planning some
> > meetings to show what's Royale is capable. I think I'm near, since
> until
> > now, without things like Jewel, that was not possible, since you can
> sell
> > Royale showing a screen built with only Basic components, since they
> are
> > not styled.
> >
> > I think we are now near to make some marketing thanks to the visuals
> > developed, but still need to complete more on that effort to be able
> to
> > showcase what we want to show! :)
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> >
> > 2018-04-24 19:28 GMT+02:00 Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>:
> >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > These are very important points. Folks - Adobe is focused
> elsewhere. From
> > > my perspective they are focused on technologies originally based on
> > Apache
> > > Sling, Fellx and Jackrabbit. Managing Experience in the Cloud etc,
> AI,
> > > etcetera.
> > >
> > > There is an opportunity for Royale Developers to convert Flex/Air
> > > applications to Royale frameworks. Find your customers …. Go!
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Dave
> > >
> > > > On Apr 24, 2018, at 9:16 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.INVALID
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > This is not an official Adobe statement, just my personal
> opinion.
> > > Adobe is not "investing" in Apache Royale. Adobe is "generously
> donating
> > > resources". Probably well past one million dollars so far. An
> > investment
> > > usually has an expected payback. A charitable donation does not.
> Adobe
> > is
> > > unlikely to try to build a business around Royale.
> > > >
> > > > So the factors that affect Peter's assignment on Royale and my
> > > assignment on Royale have nothing to do with "if Adobe spends a
> bit more
> > > they will make more money". It is simply, "how much do we (Adobe)
> want
> > to
> > > spend on goodwill". Those of you who personally give to charities
> > probably
> > > have some way of evaluating which charities to give to. Adobe is
> in the
> > > same situation in terms of donating resources to open source
> projects at
> > > Apache and elsewhere. It has to make sense to them from a "what
> do our
> > > customers think of our company" perspective.
> > > >
> > > > If some major Adobe customers decided to use Royale, that would
> make it
> > > more important to Adobe to make sure they are successful. But we
> have
> > not
> > > done that so far. Instead we spend our time rewriting how we
> manage
> > > classNames, nitpicking about licensing, and discussing lots of
> other
> > things
> > > when I would much rather we prove that we can help a second
> customer
> > > migrate. And then a third customer. I believe if we had already
> somehow
> > > attracted that third customer and they were an important Adobe
> customer,
> > > Peter would not have been re-assigned.
> > > >
> > > > This is Apache, so you can scratch any itch you want, but when
> I do
> > any
> > > work on Royale, my eyes are always on how I can keep convincing my
> > > management to keep donating, not keep investing. And my
> management cares
> > > little about the internals and much more about who our users are.
> > > >
> > > > My 2 cents,
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 4/24/18, 7:59 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of
> Carlos
> > > Rovira" <carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of
> carlosrovira@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash
> Player
> > > will
> > > > be removed from Browsers.
> > > > So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache
> Royale. Both
> > > > users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and
> Royale
> > > > becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I
> envision
> > > > Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React
> that
> > this
> > > > years have been the "middle step" to something like we are
> creating
> > here.
> > > > So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since
> I
> > truly
> > > > think we can make a difference
> > > >
> > > > C.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi Peter,
> > > >>
> > > >>> 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...
> > > >>
> > > >> Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann
> > Hesse,
> > > >> German poem) ;-)
> > > >> However, let us know if the community can do anything in order
> to
> > > convince
> > > >> Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
> > > >> My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
> > > >> Announcement", we have much more attention.
> > > >> And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which
> has to
> > be
> > > >> migrated.
> > > >> So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may
> want to
> > > >> continue their job so that their customers can migrate their
> Flex apps
> > > with
> > > >> as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
> > > >>
> > > >> I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
> > > >>
> > > >> Thank you for all that work, Peter!
> > > >> Olaf
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > > http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.
> > > com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3
> > > fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> > > 7C636601787726789792&sdata=2ZNZcdyDt9go76qv6%
> 2FtjuMQ0oxojJdlJW1vpqgof1yU%
> > > 3D&reserved=0
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Carlos Rovira
> > > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%
> 40adobe.com%
> > > 7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> > > cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=3i%2B%2FtdQ%
> > > 2BIFTA0xDCTZTuW6OQBhh0AbDpRA8ObSnwLEM%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C0595c2e7f7f249bdf32908d5aa6ecd78%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636602315232491341&sdata=Ex21qdgaVtBY%
> 2FEZeHVk8XFkt6rnUfRZWiNP3L3bhDi4%3D&reserved=0
> >
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
IMO, we don’t need a survey, just the right words in the subject and body of emails that will start discussion and elicit responses. Olaf, if you can take the lead on drafting that, it would be helpful.
What kinds of things are folks thinking must be on private@? Unfortunately, even answer we don't want to hear should be heard in public.
My 2 cents,
-Alex
On 4/27/18, 4:38 AM, "Olaf Krueger" <ma...@olafkrueger.net> wrote:
>I was saying mainly to prepare the content (questions) to ask.
I'll think about it and will prepare some questions during the weekend.
Let's see what others think if we should discuss this here or on @private
next week.
Olaf
--
Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5fa7edb2f4b94bae037708d5ac33510f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636604258858294845&sdata=hqz3xsC7KaM%2FomKpT%2Bv0kArA%2F0CGvHQ6ZZ8vk7MeSjs%3D&reserved=0
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>.
>I was saying mainly to prepare the content (questions) to ask.
I'll think about it and will prepare some questions during the weekend.
Let's see what others think if we should discuss this here or on @private
next week.
Olaf
--
Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Olaf,
I was saying mainly to prepare the content (questions) to ask.
If others think is a good place to discuss question is ok.
As you say questions should be the right ones or we can hurt the project
more than help it
For me creating the google form, twitter form, google+ form... is something
more quick and easy once we have the questions
thanks!
Carlos
2018-04-27 10:48 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
> Hi Carlos,
>
> >could you design a form?
> Yes, of course, I could try to prepare a survey by using one of those
> tools...
> But I don't want to waste time and start with something like this until we
> are really sure to start such an online survey.
> In the worst case, the results could hurt our project... but I guess we
> could avoid this by taking care of the questions.
>
> > maybe that should be discussed in private ...
> Hmm, I am not sure about if there's any reason to not discuss this here.
>
> Thanks,
> Olaf
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>.
Hi Carlos,
>could you design a form?
Yes, of course, I could try to prepare a survey by using one of those
tools...
But I don't want to waste time and start with something like this until we
are really sure to start such an online survey.
In the worst case, the results could hurt our project... but I guess we
could avoid this by taking care of the questions.
> maybe that should be discussed in private ...
Hmm, I am not sure about if there's any reason to not discuss this here.
Thanks,
Olaf
--
Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>.
--
Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
hi Olaf,
could you design a form? maybe that should be discussed in private and then
see if we should post it even on social networks
But I think this could be a great start point for a marketing campaign
Could you help there? I think the rest are almost overloaded, but I can
support you with the final form we all agree to put it live on website,
social, and more
2018-04-26 7:32 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
> >Maybe we should send a "Hey do you still have Flex apps, what are you
> going
> to do about them?" on >dev@flex and users@flex.
>
> What do you think about doing an online survey by using Google forms [1] or
> TypeForm [2] or whatever free tool? Of course, there's also a 'danger' by
> doing of a survey related to its results.
> If we'd like to do something we have to think carefully about the
> questions.
>
> Thanks,
> Olaf
>
>
> [1] https://docs.google.com/forms/u/0/
> [2] https://www.typeform.com/
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>.
Alex,
All of those question should be definitely sent on dev and users Flex list.
We are too silent there. We should make from time to time some eye catch
posts. - Which are saying - Hey we are here - Come and try!
Definitely your questions is a starting point.
Piotr
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018, 7:32 AM Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net> wrote:
> >Maybe we should send a "Hey do you still have Flex apps, what are you
> going
> to do about them?" on >dev@flex and users@flex.
>
> What do you think about doing an online survey by using Google forms [1] or
> TypeForm [2] or whatever free tool? Of course, there's also a 'danger' by
> doing of a survey related to its results.
> If we'd like to do something we have to think carefully about the
> questions.
>
> Thanks,
> Olaf
>
>
> [1] https://docs.google.com/forms/u/0/
> [2] https://www.typeform.com/
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
>
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>.
>Maybe we should send a "Hey do you still have Flex apps, what are you going
to do about them?" on >dev@flex and users@flex.
What do you think about doing an online survey by using Google forms [1] or
TypeForm [2] or whatever free tool? Of course, there's also a 'danger' by
doing of a survey related to its results.
If we'd like to do something we have to think carefully about the questions.
Thanks,
Olaf
[1] https://docs.google.com/forms/u/0/
[2] https://www.typeform.com/
--
Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
Hi Carlos,
I'm going to reply to both threads here. Again, this is my personal opinion and not an official Adobe statement.
I don’t think there is a charity anywhere that won't tell a donor that "with a little more money and time we can do something great". The fact is that the donor has to decide where to give. There too many good causes to give to all of them.
IMO, if you have an important donor that you don't want to lose, you have to consider whether you can or should customize your message to continue to attract that donor. That's why I said earlier that I'm always trying to align Royale with Adobe's goals. The question for me and hopefully for others on Royale is: which goals?
Adobe does not seem interested in application developers outside of Cordova/PhoneGap. So we've spent some time making sure Royale can output Cordova apps, but I haven't found a way to promote that inside or outside of Adobe yet. Adobe is interested in building its web presence around the Cloud. That's why I wish I had time to create royale.a.o in Royale so we could try to show how we can do the job as well as, or better than, say, React or other JS frameworks. I'm not sure there are many important Flex apps left at Adobe. Two of biggest ones I know of have been replaced instead of migrated. But if we could demonstrate to Adobe that it could save time developing its web presence in Royale or have fewer bugs, then we've aligned with that goal.
I was surprised that the Flash 2020 announcement didn't generate more interest in FlexJS/Royale. I was hoping that at least one major Adobe customer would speak up and say that they still had a lot of Flex apps to migrate and were interested in Royale, but that didn't happen. It is interesting to note that you know of customers that are still on Flex and we still see signs of that on the mailing lists from time to time. My question is: what are these folks planning to do with their Flex apps? There are some 600 people on dev@flex, 400 on users@flex, 70 on dev@royale, 50 on users@royale, and about 200 folks following Royale on twitter. Are any of them major Adobe customers? Or do the rest collectively form a major impact on Adobe? I only see a few big-name company domains for folks subscribing to the Flex lists and they have not yet subscribed to Royale lists. So what are the big companies that had big Flex apps doing? Have they already migrated everything off of Flex/Flash? Like I said above, Adobe is doing so without using Royale. Or did they not understand what's going to happen in 2020? If they were betting on FlexJS/Royale, then they should speak up about Adobe reducing resources on Royale.
One piece of feedback I heard from a major Adobe customer was that FlexJS/Royale did not have 24/7 support. There was no phone number to call when things break and no executives to escalate to if support was not satisfactory. Having a company with a good track record pick up support for Royale would probably have a huge impact for enterprises who are sitting on Flex apps. If there are any.
Maybe we should send a "Hey do you still have Flex apps, what are you going to do about them?" on dev@flex and users@flex. In the meantime, can you tell us what your customers are planning to do? Do they understand what is going to happen in 2020? If you are reading this email and have a Flex app, please speak up about what your plans are.
Thanks,
-Alex
On 4/24/18, 10:38 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <pi...@gmail.com> wrote:
Carlos,
That would be great :)
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, 12:00 AM Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
wrote:
> That's so real David,
>
> we know lots of clients that still are in Flex, and I'm planning some
> meetings to show what's Royale is capable. I think I'm near, since until
> now, without things like Jewel, that was not possible, since you can sell
> Royale showing a screen built with only Basic components, since they are
> not styled.
>
> I think we are now near to make some marketing thanks to the visuals
> developed, but still need to complete more on that effort to be able to
> showcase what we want to show! :)
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> 2018-04-24 19:28 GMT+02:00 Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>:
>
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > These are very important points. Folks - Adobe is focused elsewhere. From
> > my perspective they are focused on technologies originally based on
> Apache
> > Sling, Fellx and Jackrabbit. Managing Experience in the Cloud etc, AI,
> > etcetera.
> >
> > There is an opportunity for Royale Developers to convert Flex/Air
> > applications to Royale frameworks. Find your customers …. Go!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave
> >
> > > On Apr 24, 2018, at 9:16 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This is not an official Adobe statement, just my personal opinion.
> > Adobe is not "investing" in Apache Royale. Adobe is "generously donating
> > resources". Probably well past one million dollars so far. An
> investment
> > usually has an expected payback. A charitable donation does not. Adobe
> is
> > unlikely to try to build a business around Royale.
> > >
> > > So the factors that affect Peter's assignment on Royale and my
> > assignment on Royale have nothing to do with "if Adobe spends a bit more
> > they will make more money". It is simply, "how much do we (Adobe) want
> to
> > spend on goodwill". Those of you who personally give to charities
> probably
> > have some way of evaluating which charities to give to. Adobe is in the
> > same situation in terms of donating resources to open source projects at
> > Apache and elsewhere. It has to make sense to them from a "what do our
> > customers think of our company" perspective.
> > >
> > > If some major Adobe customers decided to use Royale, that would make it
> > more important to Adobe to make sure they are successful. But we have
> not
> > done that so far. Instead we spend our time rewriting how we manage
> > classNames, nitpicking about licensing, and discussing lots of other
> things
> > when I would much rather we prove that we can help a second customer
> > migrate. And then a third customer. I believe if we had already somehow
> > attracted that third customer and they were an important Adobe customer,
> > Peter would not have been re-assigned.
> > >
> > > This is Apache, so you can scratch any itch you want, but when I do
> any
> > work on Royale, my eyes are always on how I can keep convincing my
> > management to keep donating, not keep investing. And my management cares
> > little about the internals and much more about who our users are.
> > >
> > > My 2 cents,
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 4/24/18, 7:59 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
> > Rovira" <carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrovira@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash Player
> > will
> > > be removed from Browsers.
> > > So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache Royale. Both
> > > users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and Royale
> > > becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I envision
> > > Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React that
> this
> > > years have been the "middle step" to something like we are creating
> here.
> > > So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since I
> truly
> > > think we can make a difference
> > >
> > > C.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
> > >
> > >> Hi Peter,
> > >>
> > >>> 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...
> > >>
> > >> Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann
> Hesse,
> > >> German poem) ;-)
> > >> However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to
> > convince
> > >> Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
> > >> My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
> > >> Announcement", we have much more attention.
> > >> And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has to
> be
> > >> migrated.
> > >> So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want to
> > >> continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex apps
> > with
> > >> as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
> > >>
> > >> I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
> > >>
> > >> Thank you for all that work, Peter!
> > >> Olaf
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.
> > com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3
> > fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> > 7C636601787726789792&sdata=2ZNZcdyDt9go76qv6%2FtjuMQ0oxojJdlJW1vpqgof1yU%
> > 3D&reserved=0
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> > 7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> > cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=3i%2B%2FtdQ%
> > 2BIFTA0xDCTZTuW6OQBhh0AbDpRA8ObSnwLEM%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0595c2e7f7f249bdf32908d5aa6ecd78%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636602315232491341&sdata=Ex21qdgaVtBY%2FEZeHVk8XFkt6rnUfRZWiNP3L3bhDi4%3D&reserved=0
>
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>.
Carlos,
That would be great :)
On Wed, Apr 25, 2018, 12:00 AM Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
wrote:
> That's so real David,
>
> we know lots of clients that still are in Flex, and I'm planning some
> meetings to show what's Royale is capable. I think I'm near, since until
> now, without things like Jewel, that was not possible, since you can sell
> Royale showing a screen built with only Basic components, since they are
> not styled.
>
> I think we are now near to make some marketing thanks to the visuals
> developed, but still need to complete more on that effort to be able to
> showcase what we want to show! :)
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> 2018-04-24 19:28 GMT+02:00 Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>:
>
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > These are very important points. Folks - Adobe is focused elsewhere. From
> > my perspective they are focused on technologies originally based on
> Apache
> > Sling, Fellx and Jackrabbit. Managing Experience in the Cloud etc, AI,
> > etcetera.
> >
> > There is an opportunity for Royale Developers to convert Flex/Air
> > applications to Royale frameworks. Find your customers …. Go!
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave
> >
> > > On Apr 24, 2018, at 9:16 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This is not an official Adobe statement, just my personal opinion.
> > Adobe is not "investing" in Apache Royale. Adobe is "generously donating
> > resources". Probably well past one million dollars so far. An
> investment
> > usually has an expected payback. A charitable donation does not. Adobe
> is
> > unlikely to try to build a business around Royale.
> > >
> > > So the factors that affect Peter's assignment on Royale and my
> > assignment on Royale have nothing to do with "if Adobe spends a bit more
> > they will make more money". It is simply, "how much do we (Adobe) want
> to
> > spend on goodwill". Those of you who personally give to charities
> probably
> > have some way of evaluating which charities to give to. Adobe is in the
> > same situation in terms of donating resources to open source projects at
> > Apache and elsewhere. It has to make sense to them from a "what do our
> > customers think of our company" perspective.
> > >
> > > If some major Adobe customers decided to use Royale, that would make it
> > more important to Adobe to make sure they are successful. But we have
> not
> > done that so far. Instead we spend our time rewriting how we manage
> > classNames, nitpicking about licensing, and discussing lots of other
> things
> > when I would much rather we prove that we can help a second customer
> > migrate. And then a third customer. I believe if we had already somehow
> > attracted that third customer and they were an important Adobe customer,
> > Peter would not have been re-assigned.
> > >
> > > This is Apache, so you can scratch any itch you want, but when I do
> any
> > work on Royale, my eyes are always on how I can keep convincing my
> > management to keep donating, not keep investing. And my management cares
> > little about the internals and much more about who our users are.
> > >
> > > My 2 cents,
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 4/24/18, 7:59 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
> > Rovira" <carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrovira@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash Player
> > will
> > > be removed from Browsers.
> > > So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache Royale. Both
> > > users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and Royale
> > > becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I envision
> > > Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React that
> this
> > > years have been the "middle step" to something like we are creating
> here.
> > > So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since I
> truly
> > > think we can make a difference
> > >
> > > C.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
> > >
> > >> Hi Peter,
> > >>
> > >>> 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...
> > >>
> > >> Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann
> Hesse,
> > >> German poem) ;-)
> > >> However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to
> > convince
> > >> Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
> > >> My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
> > >> Announcement", we have much more attention.
> > >> And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has to
> be
> > >> migrated.
> > >> So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want to
> > >> continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex apps
> > with
> > >> as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
> > >>
> > >> I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
> > >>
> > >> Thank you for all that work, Peter!
> > >> Olaf
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.
> > com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3
> > fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> > 7C636601787726789792&sdata=2ZNZcdyDt9go76qv6%2FtjuMQ0oxojJdlJW1vpqgof1yU%
> > 3D&reserved=0
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> > 7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> > cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=3i%2B%2FtdQ%
> > 2BIFTA0xDCTZTuW6OQBhh0AbDpRA8ObSnwLEM%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
That's so real David,
we know lots of clients that still are in Flex, and I'm planning some
meetings to show what's Royale is capable. I think I'm near, since until
now, without things like Jewel, that was not possible, since you can sell
Royale showing a screen built with only Basic components, since they are
not styled.
I think we are now near to make some marketing thanks to the visuals
developed, but still need to complete more on that effort to be able to
showcase what we want to show! :)
Thanks!
2018-04-24 19:28 GMT+02:00 Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>:
> Hi Alex,
>
> These are very important points. Folks - Adobe is focused elsewhere. From
> my perspective they are focused on technologies originally based on Apache
> Sling, Fellx and Jackrabbit. Managing Experience in the Cloud etc, AI,
> etcetera.
>
> There is an opportunity for Royale Developers to convert Flex/Air
> applications to Royale frameworks. Find your customers …. Go!
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> > On Apr 24, 2018, at 9:16 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
> wrote:
> >
> > This is not an official Adobe statement, just my personal opinion.
> Adobe is not "investing" in Apache Royale. Adobe is "generously donating
> resources". Probably well past one million dollars so far. An investment
> usually has an expected payback. A charitable donation does not. Adobe is
> unlikely to try to build a business around Royale.
> >
> > So the factors that affect Peter's assignment on Royale and my
> assignment on Royale have nothing to do with "if Adobe spends a bit more
> they will make more money". It is simply, "how much do we (Adobe) want to
> spend on goodwill". Those of you who personally give to charities probably
> have some way of evaluating which charities to give to. Adobe is in the
> same situation in terms of donating resources to open source projects at
> Apache and elsewhere. It has to make sense to them from a "what do our
> customers think of our company" perspective.
> >
> > If some major Adobe customers decided to use Royale, that would make it
> more important to Adobe to make sure they are successful. But we have not
> done that so far. Instead we spend our time rewriting how we manage
> classNames, nitpicking about licensing, and discussing lots of other things
> when I would much rather we prove that we can help a second customer
> migrate. And then a third customer. I believe if we had already somehow
> attracted that third customer and they were an important Adobe customer,
> Peter would not have been re-assigned.
> >
> > This is Apache, so you can scratch any itch you want, but when I do any
> work on Royale, my eyes are always on how I can keep convincing my
> management to keep donating, not keep investing. And my management cares
> little about the internals and much more about who our users are.
> >
> > My 2 cents,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 4/24/18, 7:59 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
> Rovira" <carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrovira@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash Player
> will
> > be removed from Browsers.
> > So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache Royale. Both
> > users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and Royale
> > becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I envision
> > Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React that this
> > years have been the "middle step" to something like we are creating here.
> > So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since I truly
> > think we can make a difference
> >
> > C.
> >
> >
> >
> > 2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
> >
> >> Hi Peter,
> >>
> >>> 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...
> >>
> >> Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann Hesse,
> >> German poem) ;-)
> >> However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to
> convince
> >> Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
> >> My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
> >> Announcement", we have much more attention.
> >> And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has to be
> >> migrated.
> >> So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want to
> >> continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex apps
> with
> >> as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
> >>
> >> I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
> >>
> >> Thank you for all that work, Peter!
> >> Olaf
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.
> com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3
> fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636601787726789792&sdata=2ZNZcdyDt9go76qv6%2FtjuMQ0oxojJdlJW1vpqgof1yU%
> 3D&reserved=0
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=3i%2B%2FtdQ%
> 2BIFTA0xDCTZTuW6OQBhh0AbDpRA8ObSnwLEM%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Royale Frameworks and More
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi Alex,
These are very important points. Folks - Adobe is focused elsewhere. From my perspective they are focused on technologies originally based on Apache Sling, Fellx and Jackrabbit. Managing Experience in the Cloud etc, AI, etcetera.
There is an opportunity for Royale Developers to convert Flex/Air applications to Royale frameworks. Find your customers …. Go!
Regards,
Dave
> On Apr 24, 2018, at 9:16 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote:
>
> This is not an official Adobe statement, just my personal opinion. Adobe is not "investing" in Apache Royale. Adobe is "generously donating resources". Probably well past one million dollars so far. An investment usually has an expected payback. A charitable donation does not. Adobe is unlikely to try to build a business around Royale.
>
> So the factors that affect Peter's assignment on Royale and my assignment on Royale have nothing to do with "if Adobe spends a bit more they will make more money". It is simply, "how much do we (Adobe) want to spend on goodwill". Those of you who personally give to charities probably have some way of evaluating which charities to give to. Adobe is in the same situation in terms of donating resources to open source projects at Apache and elsewhere. It has to make sense to them from a "what do our customers think of our company" perspective.
>
> If some major Adobe customers decided to use Royale, that would make it more important to Adobe to make sure they are successful. But we have not done that so far. Instead we spend our time rewriting how we manage classNames, nitpicking about licensing, and discussing lots of other things when I would much rather we prove that we can help a second customer migrate. And then a third customer. I believe if we had already somehow attracted that third customer and they were an important Adobe customer, Peter would not have been re-assigned.
>
> This is Apache, so you can scratch any itch you want, but when I do any work on Royale, my eyes are always on how I can keep convincing my management to keep donating, not keep investing. And my management cares little about the internals and much more about who our users are.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 4/24/18, 7:59 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrovira@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash Player will
> be removed from Browsers.
> So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache Royale. Both
> users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and Royale
> becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I envision
> Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React that this
> years have been the "middle step" to something like we are creating here.
> So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since I truly
> think we can make a difference
>
> C.
>
>
>
> 2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
>
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>>> 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...
>>
>> Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann Hesse,
>> German poem) ;-)
>> However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to convince
>> Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
>> My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
>> Announcement", we have much more attention.
>> And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has to be
>> migrated.
>> So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want to
>> continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex apps with
>> as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
>>
>> I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
>>
>> Thank you for all that work, Peter!
>> Olaf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=2ZNZcdyDt9go76qv6%2FtjuMQ0oxojJdlJW1vpqgof1yU%3D&reserved=0
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=3i%2B%2FtdQ%2BIFTA0xDCTZTuW6OQBhh0AbDpRA8ObSnwLEM%3D&reserved=0
>
>
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
This is not an official Adobe statement, just my personal opinion. Adobe is not "investing" in Apache Royale. Adobe is "generously donating resources". Probably well past one million dollars so far. An investment usually has an expected payback. A charitable donation does not. Adobe is unlikely to try to build a business around Royale.
So the factors that affect Peter's assignment on Royale and my assignment on Royale have nothing to do with "if Adobe spends a bit more they will make more money". It is simply, "how much do we (Adobe) want to spend on goodwill". Those of you who personally give to charities probably have some way of evaluating which charities to give to. Adobe is in the same situation in terms of donating resources to open source projects at Apache and elsewhere. It has to make sense to them from a "what do our customers think of our company" perspective.
If some major Adobe customers decided to use Royale, that would make it more important to Adobe to make sure they are successful. But we have not done that so far. Instead we spend our time rewriting how we manage classNames, nitpicking about licensing, and discussing lots of other things when I would much rather we prove that we can help a second customer migrate. And then a third customer. I believe if we had already somehow attracted that third customer and they were an important Adobe customer, Peter would not have been re-assigned.
This is Apache, so you can scratch any itch you want, but when I do any work on Royale, my eyes are always on how I can keep convincing my management to keep donating, not keep investing. And my management cares little about the internals and much more about who our users are.
My 2 cents,
-Alex
On 4/24/18, 7:59 AM, "carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <carlos.rovira@gmail.com on behalf of carlosrovira@apache.org> wrote:
I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash Player will
be removed from Browsers.
So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache Royale. Both
users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and Royale
becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I envision
Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React that this
years have been the "middle step" to something like we are creating here.
So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since I truly
think we can make a difference
C.
2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
> Hi Peter,
>
> >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...
>
> Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann Hesse,
> German poem) ;-)
> However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to convince
> Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
> My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
> Announcement", we have much more attention.
> And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has to be
> migrated.
> So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want to
> continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex apps with
> as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
>
> I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
>
> Thank you for all that work, Peter!
> Olaf
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=2ZNZcdyDt9go76qv6%2FtjuMQ0oxojJdlJW1vpqgof1yU%3D&reserved=0
>
--
Carlos Rovira
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b935504e8ec432c66e108d5a9f3fbf3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601787726789792&sdata=3i%2B%2FtdQ%2BIFTA0xDCTZTuW6OQBhh0AbDpRA8ObSnwLEM%3D&reserved=0
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
I think things will be converging until we reach 2020 and Flash Player will
be removed from Browsers.
So we should expect more a more things happening in Apache Royale. Both
users coming, people wanting to migrate from Flex to Royale, and Royale
becoming more a more ready to solve many problems out there. I envision
Royale as the replacement of technologies like Angular or React that this
years have been the "middle step" to something like we are creating here.
So I think Adobe should continue investing with Peter here since I truly
think we can make a difference
C.
2018-04-24 11:41 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>:
> Hi Peter,
>
> >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...
>
> Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann Hesse,
> German poem) ;-)
> However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to convince
> Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
> My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
> Announcement", we have much more attention.
> And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has to be
> migrated.
> So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want to
> continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex apps with
> as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
>
> I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
>
> Thank you for all that work, Peter!
> Olaf
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Olaf Krueger <ma...@olafkrueger.net>.
Hi Peter,
>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...
Keep in mind that "A magic dwells in each beginning..." (Hermann Hesse,
German poem) ;-)
However, let us know if the community can do anything in order to convince
Adobe to let you continue working on Royale!
My perception is that since Royale and the "End of FlashPlayer
Announcement", we have much more attention.
And I guess there are still a lot of Flex apps out there which has to be
migrated.
So, even if Adobe has done a lot for the community, they may want to
continue their job so that their customers can migrate their Flex apps with
as little effort as possible... by using Royale!
I'll take a look at the Foundation stuff!
Thank you for all that work, Peter!
Olaf
--
Sent from: http://apache-royale-development.20373.n8.nabble.com/
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Peter Ent <pe...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
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 <ah...@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" <pe...@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" <he...@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 <pe...@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%7C0f679c51ad234ba737d208d5a9
>bd764a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636601553580689134&sda
>ta=cgXmmJUy8di%2Fu%2BqcRJ%2FtV5YgQVTlnYdTs6hzM8Bgp8U%3D&reserved=0
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
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 <ah...@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" <pe...@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" <he...@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 <pe...@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
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@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" <pe...@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" <he...@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 <pe...@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%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%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%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7
>>C0%7C0%7C636600381788184543&sdata=MtF1eGblWYuSi%2F3nBxEulYrJg%2Fz5u6FliZt
>>2SjT%2F0po%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> Regards,
>> Peter Ent
>>
>>
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Peter Ent <pe...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
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" <he...@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 <pe...@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%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%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%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7
>>C0%7C0%7C636600381788184543&sdata=MtF1eGblWYuSi%2F3nBxEulYrJg%2Fz5u6FliZt
>>2SjT%2F0po%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> Regards,
>> Peter Ent
>>
>>
Re: Royale Foundation and More
Posted by Niclas Hedhman <he...@gmail.com>.
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 <pe...@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://github.com/pentapache/royale-foundation
>
> [2] Apache Royale Foundation Wiki (in the Repo):
> https://github.com/pentapache/royale-foundation/wiki
>
> Regards,
> Peter Ent
>
>