You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Omar Gonzalez <om...@gmail.com> on 2012/01/20 23:58:39 UTC
And with svn commit: r1234192...
Let the party begin!... ok... maybe its the pre-party... but we can start
to get a little buzz! :P woohoo!
Thanks for all your hard work Carol/Alex in getting it this far, almost
there!
-omar
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>.
Hi,
I didn't even notice that. I see in the build_framework.xml the problem.
I would want confirmation the value needs to be set to 11.1, seems
like the obvious problem.
I have this checked out and could update it. Any one to agree the 11.1
is the target?
Mike
Quoting Chema Balsas <jb...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Erik, your problem is in the different version numbers:
>
> "unable to open '/Applications/Adobe Flash Builder
> 4.6/sdks/4.6.5.0001/frameworks/libs/player/11.1/playerglobal.swc<http://4.6.5.1/frameworks/libs/player/11.1/playerglobal.swc>
> '"
>
> /Applications/Adobe Flash Builder
> 4.6/sdks/4.6.5.0001/frameworks/libs/player/11.0/playerglobal.swc<http://4.6.5.1/frameworks/libs/player/11.0/playerglobal.swc>
>
> An easy solution is to just create a 11.1 folder and copy the
> playerglobal.swc there.
>
>
> I assume this is a build issue as in flex-config.xml you can see
> <target-player>11.1</target-player>
>
> However, in the build_framework.xml it says
> <property name="playerglobal.version" value="11.0"/>
>
> So even though the sdk is expecting the 11.1 version, the build system is
> producing the 11.0
>
> Could someone fix this?
>
> On the other hand, for statistical purpose, the build worked just fine with
> the defaults in MacOSX Lion and the last flex sdk 4.6.0.23201
>
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_29-b11-402-11M3527)
> Apache Ant(TM) version 1.8.2 compiled on June 3 2011
>
>
> Cheers
> Chema
>
> 2012/1/21 Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>
>
>> > How are you building your browser application? ANT build file?
>>
>> No, Flash Builder 4.6... A brand new Web Project with only two
>> modifications: a Label component in Main.mxml with 'text' property
>> "Hello world" and in the project properties I've selected 'my' SDK.
>> Then I simply try to do a 'Debug' run.
>>
>> > This seems like some configuration location problem in your build.
>>
>> Ok. How might I debug/check this?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> EdB
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>
>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>
>> T. 06-51952295
>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Chema
>
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
> An easy solution is to just create a 11.1 folder and copy the
> playerglobal.swc there.
>
> I assume this is a build issue as in flex-config.xml you can see
> <target-player>11.1</target-player>
>
> However, in the build_framework.xml it says
> <property name="playerglobal.version" value="11.0"/>
Exactly. I renamed the existing 11.0 folder to 11.1, and that works,
the project builds and plays in the browser!
You have very sharp eyes, and I'm almost embarrassed I didn't catch
that myself. I guess the whole process is a bit daunting, which makes
it easy to overlook the obvious stuff. Thank you!
I am writing all this down, so other newbies might experience a bit
shallower learning curve ;-)
EdB
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Chema Balsas <jb...@gmail.com>.
Hi Erik, your problem is in the different version numbers:
"unable to open '/Applications/Adobe Flash Builder
4.6/sdks/4.6.5.0001/frameworks/libs/player/11.1/playerglobal.swc<http://4.6.5.1/frameworks/libs/player/11.1/playerglobal.swc>
'"
/Applications/Adobe Flash Builder
4.6/sdks/4.6.5.0001/frameworks/libs/player/11.0/playerglobal.swc<http://4.6.5.1/frameworks/libs/player/11.0/playerglobal.swc>
An easy solution is to just create a 11.1 folder and copy the
playerglobal.swc there.
I assume this is a build issue as in flex-config.xml you can see
<target-player>11.1</target-player>
However, in the build_framework.xml it says
<property name="playerglobal.version" value="11.0"/>
So even though the sdk is expecting the 11.1 version, the build system is
producing the 11.0
Could someone fix this?
On the other hand, for statistical purpose, the build worked just fine with
the defaults in MacOSX Lion and the last flex sdk 4.6.0.23201
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_29-b11-402-11M3527)
Apache Ant(TM) version 1.8.2 compiled on June 3 2011
Cheers
Chema
2012/1/21 Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>
> > How are you building your browser application? ANT build file?
>
> No, Flash Builder 4.6... A brand new Web Project with only two
> modifications: a Label component in Main.mxml with 'text' property
> "Hello world" and in the project properties I've selected 'my' SDK.
> Then I simply try to do a 'Debug' run.
>
> > This seems like some configuration location problem in your build.
>
> Ok. How might I debug/check this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> EdB
>
>
>
> --
> Ix Multimedia Software
>
> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> 3521 VB Utrecht
>
> T. 06-51952295
> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>
--
Chema
Re: FB playerglobal.swc 'unable to open' error (was Re: And with svn
commit: r1234192...)
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
> So you have verified that the swc does exist in the location right? I don't
> use a Mac so I don't know how permissions are setup, do you think that might
> be an issue since it was downloaded?
The swc exists, yes. I don't do much command line kung-fu, but I just
did "chown erik playerglobal.swc", which, to the best of my knowledge,
should make it 'mine'.
I didn't change the permissions on the .swc, they are: -rw-r--r--
No change :(
EdB
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
FB playerglobal.swc 'unable to open' error (was Re: And with svn
commit: r1234192...)
Posted by Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>.
Quoting Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>:
>> How are you building your browser application? ANT build file?
>
> No, Flash Builder 4.6... A brand new Web Project with only two
> modifications: a Label component in Main.mxml with 'text' property
> "Hello world" and in the project properties I've selected 'my' SDK.
> Then I simply try to do a 'Debug' run.
>
>> This seems like some configuration location problem in your build.
>
> Ok. How might I debug/check this?
>
So you have verified that the swc does exist in the location right? I
don't use a Mac so I don't know how permissions are setup, do you
think that might be an issue since it was downloaded?
I see in the flex-config.xml that loads, the player version is 11.1,
so that seems right.
I am going to build this later today, I'll see if I run into any
issues with FlashBuilder.
Mike
PS As far as your question about is this the right place to ask this
question, yes I would say it is, you are building the framework and
trying to use it. Basically, you are using the development version of
the SDK and this is flex-dev. :)
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
> How are you building your browser application? ANT build file?
No, Flash Builder 4.6... A brand new Web Project with only two
modifications: a Label component in Main.mxml with 'text' property
"Hello world" and in the project properties I've selected 'my' SDK.
Then I simply try to do a 'Debug' run.
> This seems like some configuration location problem in your build.
Ok. How might I debug/check this?
Thanks,
EdB
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>.
Quoting Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>:
>> Is there something I forgot to do/enter/change? Is this maybe a
>> 'version conflict' between 'my' SDK and the version used to build the
>> 'playerglobal.swc'?
>
> I forgot to mention that on my system there does exist a file in that
> location with the correct name, which got downloaded during the build:
>
> playerglobal-download:
> [get] Getting:
> http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/updaters/11/playerglobal11_0.swc
> [get] To: /Applications/Adobe Flash Builder
> 4.6/sdks/4.6.5.0001/frameworks/libs/player/11.0/playerglobal.swc
>
> EdB
>
>
How are you building your browser application? ANT build file?
This seems like some configuration location problem in your build.
Mike
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
> Is there something I forgot to do/enter/change? Is this maybe a
> 'version conflict' between 'my' SDK and the version used to build the
> 'playerglobal.swc'?
I forgot to mention that on my system there does exist a file in that
location with the correct name, which got downloaded during the build:
playerglobal-download:
[get] Getting:
http://fpdownload.macromedia.com/pub/flashplayer/updaters/11/playerglobal11_0.swc
[get] To: /Applications/Adobe Flash Builder
4.6/sdks/4.6.5.0001/frameworks/libs/player/11.0/playerglobal.swc
EdB
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
> I followed your instructions in README.txt (on OSX Lion with the build
> in Java version and Ant 1.7.0) and behold: BUILD SUCCESSFUL!
>
> So, that seems to be in working order. Thank you.
However, if I try and build a very simple web application with my
shiny new SDK, I get this message:
"unable to open '/Applications/Adobe Flash Builder
4.6/sdks/4.6.5.0001/frameworks/libs/player/11.1/playerglobal.swc'"
Is there something I forgot to do/enter/change? Is this maybe a
'version conflict' between 'my' SDK and the version used to build the
'playerglobal.swc'?
Should I even be asking these questions on THIS list?
Thanks,
Erik
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Erik de Bruin <er...@ixsoftware.nl>.
Alex,
> At minimum, we want other folks to see if they can follow the instructions
> and build an app from this code, just to make sure we didn't screw something
> up.
Total newbie here.
I followed your instructions in README.txt (on OSX Lion with the build
in Java version and Ant 1.7.0) and behold: BUILD SUCCESSFUL!
So, that seems to be in working order. Thank you.
Erik de Bruin
--
Ix Multimedia Software
Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht
T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [Automation] Could we loose automation for legal or business
reasons?
Posted by Keith Sutton <ke...@spoon.as>.
Do this mean we are at risk of loosing the automation lib due to business reasons?
---------------------
On 1/23/12 12:14 AM, "Keith Sutton"<ke...@spoon.as> wrote:
> Is there a need to raise this issue collectively with decision makers
> involved in the 'business kinks' to influence this decision?
The issue has been discussed at Adobe, if that's what you mean.
-- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
On 1/23/2012 12:18 AM, Keith Sutton wrote:
>
> Alex,
>
> You mention 'business kinks' in regards to automation. It would be
> unfortunate for this project to loose that capability in the framework
> due to business reasons. The automation library is fairly old (in
> internet terms) and used by a lot of Flex customers and testing
> tool/service providers (8-10 of them if not more). With Monocle
> ramping up as a product it would be sad to see the Apache Flex testing
> ecosystem being disseminated for it's commercial sake when there is no
> real competitor to it (even with automation).
>
> Is there a need to raise this issue collectively with decision makers
> involved in the 'business kinks' to influence this decision?
>
> On 1/22/2012 9:29 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1/22/12 9:22 AM, "Tink"<fl...@tink.ws> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If automation is missing in our first release, wouldn't that break all
>>>> automation testing that companies have invested in?
>>> Yes, and we would note that in the release notes. I think we'd have to
>>> lower our goal of the first release to not be something that EVERY
>>> person
>>> using Adobe Flex can replace. I certainly wouldn't want to hold up
>>> releases
>>> of everything else while we work out the legal and business kinks on
>>> automation.
>>>
>>
>>
>
Re: [Automation] Could we loose automation for legal or business reasons?
Posted by Dirk Eismann <bo...@googlemail.com>.
thanks Alex - good to know this.
2012/1/24 Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>:
> I had a meeting with a pretty high-level Adobe person yesterday and there is
> still desire to work out the kinks on all of these issues. It is simply a
> matter of time. Please be patient.
Re: [Automation] Could we loose automation for legal or business reasons?
Posted by Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>.
spoon.as
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Keith Sutton <ke...@spoon.as> wrote:
> Besides the official blog post does anyone have a list of the things that
> came out of the Flex Summit?
--
Jonathan Campos
Re: [Automation] Could we loose automation for legal or business
reasons?
Posted by Keith Sutton <ke...@spoon.as>.
Besides the official blog post does anyone have a list of the things
that came out of the Flex Summit?
On 1/24/2012 10:26 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>
> On 1/23/12 2:46 PM, "Tink"<fl...@tink.ws> wrote:
>
>> I'd like to know if the status is
>>
>> complete (spark components etc)
>> legal (automation etc)
>> development (falcon etc)
>> idle (not sure if we have any idle, which is why this list would be
>> useful, but anything that Adobe plan to contribute, but there is no
>> active progress).
>>
>> Including things like the status of Adobe having donated the name
>> 'Flex' as well would be good to be included.
>>
>> Would something like that be feasible (Alex, Carol?), and be useful
>> everyone else?
> I would prefer not to have to divert energy to maintain a status page. If
> it isn't in Apache, it is held up by some business, legal or logistical
> reason, and an hour after updating the status can be rendered obsolete by
> some new discovery or development.
>
> I had a meeting with a pretty high-level Adobe person yesterday and there is
> still desire to work out the kinks on all of these issues. It is simply a
> matter of time. Please be patient.
>
Re: [Automation] Could we loose automation for legal or business
reasons?
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/23/12 2:46 PM, "Tink" <fl...@tink.ws> wrote:
> I'd like to know if the status is
>
> complete (spark components etc)
> legal (automation etc)
> development (falcon etc)
> idle (not sure if we have any idle, which is why this list would be
> useful, but anything that Adobe plan to contribute, but there is no
> active progress).
>
> Including things like the status of Adobe having donated the name
> 'Flex' as well would be good to be included.
>
> Would something like that be feasible (Alex, Carol?), and be useful
> everyone else?
I would prefer not to have to divert energy to maintain a status page. If
it isn't in Apache, it is held up by some business, legal or logistical
reason, and an hour after updating the status can be rendered obsolete by
some new discovery or development.
I had a meeting with a pretty high-level Adobe person yesterday and there is
still desire to work out the kinks on all of these issues. It is simply a
matter of time. Please be patient.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: [Automation] Could we loose automation for legal or business reasons?
Posted by Tink <fl...@tink.ws>.
On 23 Jan 2012, at 08:18, Keith Sutton wrote:
>
> Alex,
>
> You mention 'business kinks' in regards to automation. It would be
> unfortunate for this project to loose that capability in the
> framework due to business reasons. The automation library is fairly
> old (in internet terms) and used by a lot of Flex customers and
> testing tool/service providers (8-10 of them if not more). With
> Monocle ramping up as a product it would be sad to see the Apache
> Flex testing ecosystem being disseminated for it's commercial sake
> when there is no real competitor to it (even with automation).
>
> Is there a need to raise this issue collectively with decision
> makers involved in the 'business kinks' to influence this decision?
Would it be possible to get a list here and then duplicated on the
wiki of what Adobe plans to donate and the status of it.
I'd like to know if the status is
complete (spark components etc)
legal (automation etc)
development (falcon etc)
idle (not sure if we have any idle, which is why this list would be
useful, but anything that Adobe plan to contribute, but there is no
active progress).
Including things like the status of Adobe having donated the name
'Flex' as well would be good to be included.
Would something like that be feasible (Alex, Carol?), and be useful
everyone else?
Tink
[Automation] Could we loose automation for legal or business reasons?
Posted by Keith Sutton <ke...@spoon.as>.
Alex,
You mention 'business kinks' in regards to automation. It would be
unfortunate for this project to loose that capability in the framework
due to business reasons. The automation library is fairly old (in
internet terms) and used by a lot of Flex customers and testing
tool/service providers (8-10 of them if not more). With Monocle ramping
up as a product it would be sad to see the Apache Flex testing ecosystem
being disseminated for it's commercial sake when there is no real
competitor to it (even with automation).
Is there a need to raise this issue collectively with decision makers
involved in the 'business kinks' to influence this decision?
On 1/22/2012 9:29 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>>
>> On 1/22/12 9:22 AM, "Tink"<fl...@tink.ws> wrote:
>>
>>> If automation is missing in our first release, wouldn't that break all
>>> automation testing that companies have invested in?
>> Yes, and we would note that in the release notes. I think we'd have to
>> lower our goal of the first release to not be something that EVERY
>> person
>> using Adobe Flex can replace. I certainly wouldn't want to hold up
>> releases
>> of everything else while we work out the legal and business kinks on
>> automation.
>>
>
>
Re: [Automation] Will
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/23/12 12:14 AM, "Keith Sutton" <ke...@spoon.as> wrote:
> Is there a need to raise this issue collectively with decision makers
> involved in the 'business kinks' to influence this decision?
The issue has been discussed at Adobe, if that's what you mean.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
[Automation] Will
Posted by Keith Sutton <ke...@spoon.as>.
Alex,
You mention 'business kinks' in regards to automation. It would be
unfortunate for this project to loose that capability in the framework
due to business reasons. The automation library is fairly old (in
internet terms) and used by a lot of Flex customers and testing
tool/service providers (8-10 of them if not more). With Monocle ramping
up as a product it would be sad to see the Apache Flex testing ecosystem
being disseminated for it's commercial sake when there is no real
competitor to it (even with automation).
Is there a need to raise this issue collectively with decision makers
involved in the 'business kinks' to influence this decision?
On 1/22/2012 9:29 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
> On 1/22/12 9:22 AM, "Tink"<fl...@tink.ws> wrote:
>
>> If automation is missing in our first release, wouldn't that break all
>> automation testing that companies have invested in?
> Yes, and we would note that in the release notes. I think we'd have to
> lower our goal of the first release to not be something that EVERY person
> using Adobe Flex can replace. I certainly wouldn't want to hold up releases
> of everything else while we work out the legal and business kinks on
> automation.
>
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/22/12 9:22 AM, "Tink" <fl...@tink.ws> wrote:
>
> If automation is missing in our first release, wouldn't that break all
> automation testing that companies have invested in?
Yes, and we would note that in the release notes. I think we'd have to
lower our goal of the first release to not be something that EVERY person
using Adobe Flex can replace. I certainly wouldn't want to hold up releases
of everything else while we work out the legal and business kinks on
automation.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Tink <fl...@tink.ws>.
On 21 Jan 2012, at 00:13, Alex Harui wrote:
> You will also see what got cleared legally (automation isn't in
> there)
> so you can get a better sense of what will be changeable in the
> short term.
>
> Getting JIRA and SVN history and legal clearance for the compiler is
> proving
> to take much longer than expected, so maybe it is worth trying to
> cut an
> official release from this folder. I'm open to opinions on this.
>
> And if we decide to do that, then after that, a few changes can
> probably be
> taken and another release cut, but I would advise against anything
> that will
> be painful to manually merge back to the trunk.
> --
> Alex Harui
> Flex SDK Team
> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>
If automation is missing in our first release, wouldn't that break all
automation testing that companies have invested in?
Tink
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Frédéric Thomas <we...@hotmail.com>.
-----Message d'origine-----
From: Alex Harui
> At minimum, we want other folks to see if they can follow the instructions
and build an app from this code, just to make sure we didn't screw something
up. You will also see what got cleared legally (automation isn't in there)
so you can get a better sense of what will be changeable in the short term.
Hi,
- I successfully built the sdk as indicated, using the build_framework.xml,
I wonder if it's normal that few *_rb.swc in locales was not generated
(playerglobal_rb.swc, osmf_rb.swc, mx_rb.swc, textlayout_rb.swc) ?
(I have successfully been able to run the build.xml for the
playerglobal_rb.swc but not the others).
- I've seen in the readme.txt 'The following framework files have not yet
been approved by legal for donation to the ASF' then I'm not worried about
automation.
Frédéric Thomas
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/20/12 3:59 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <mi...@teotigraphix.com> wrote:
> Alex, I'm just trying to get this straight in my head, the whiteboard
> code is there so we can start doing things right? Are you then when
> you get the SVN history dumping code into the trunk or is that only
> for release code.
>
> I swear this was brought up so excuse me if it's already been talked
> about, just to much info the last week. :)
At minimum, we want other folks to see if they can follow the instructions
and build an app from this code, just to make sure we didn't screw something
up. You will also see what got cleared legally (automation isn't in there)
so you can get a better sense of what will be changeable in the short term.
Getting JIRA and SVN history and legal clearance for the compiler is proving
to take much longer than expected, so maybe it is worth trying to cut an
official release from this folder. I'm open to opinions on this.
And if we decide to do that, then after that, a few changes can probably be
taken and another release cut, but I would advise against anything that will
be painful to manually merge back to the trunk. We still want to get the
trunk in with history, but we want to let you folks get started as well.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>.
Quoting Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>:
>
>
>
> On 1/20/12 3:00 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <mi...@teotigraphix.com> wrote:
>
>> Second this! I bet you two are ready for a vacation. :)
> We've got a long ways to go: The compiler, the mustella test suite, JIRA,
> SVN with history.
>
> But speaking of vacation, I will be in China Feb 1 through 16 and won't be
> able to do much Flex work during that time.
>
> --
> Alex Harui
> Flex SDK Team
> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>
>
Alex, I'm just trying to get this straight in my head, the whiteboard
code is there so we can start doing things right? Are you then when
you get the SVN history dumping code into the trunk or is that only
for release code.
I swear this was brought up so excuse me if it's already been talked
about, just to much info the last week. :)
Mike
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 1/20/12 3:00 PM, "Michael Schmalle" <mi...@teotigraphix.com> wrote:
> Second this! I bet you two are ready for a vacation. :)
We've got a long ways to go: The compiler, the mustella test suite, JIRA,
SVN with history.
But speaking of vacation, I will be in China Feb 1 through 16 and won't be
able to do much Flex work during that time.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: And with svn commit: r1234192...
Posted by Michael Schmalle <mi...@teotigraphix.com>.
Quoting Omar Gonzalez <om...@gmail.com>:
> Let the party begin!... ok... maybe its the pre-party... but we can start
> to get a little buzz! :P woohoo!
>
> Thanks for all your hard work Carol/Alex in getting it this far, almost
> there!
>
> -omar
>
Second this! I bet you two are ready for a vacation. :)
Mike