search

robotlegs / robotlegs-framework

An ActionScript 3 application framework for Flash and Flex
https://robotlegs.tenderapp.com/
MIT License
967 stars 261 forks source link

Release V2 #107

Closed darscan closed 11 years ago

darscan commented 11 years ago

It would be good to actually release this thing!

darscan commented 11 years ago

@creynders Let's try to get this thing released in the next couple of days. I'd like to identify the things that we can leave out for the initial release, and the things that absolutely must be done to ensure non-breaking API changes later.

Looking at the current state of the issues list I'd say that switching to a Promise based lifecycle mechanism is the one thing that will certainly break the current API. As such I'd like us to focus on it if possible.

creynders commented 11 years ago

IMO the current inter-modular communication method definitely needs to be changed before release. Problem is, I'll be hanging out with my kid and missus the next 4 days (very long weekend here in Belgium), with very little time to spend on RL.

darscan commented 11 years ago

Ah yes, true! Have a great long weekend :)

darscan commented 11 years ago

So, it seems all we have left is: Config post processing and MediatorMap conformance. Oh, and maybe a review of the LocalEventMap..

darscan commented 11 years ago

We probably need to push another beta asap - the IInjector change is probably the most backwards breaking change we've introduced in a while. Anything else we should try sneak in for b8?

creynders commented 11 years ago

Can't think of anything! I got the little Commandpayloadf*cker in, so I'm happy ;)

On Tuesday, June 4, 2013, Shaun Smith wrote:

We probably need to push another beta asap - the IInjector change is probably the most backwards breaking change we've introduced in a while. Anything else we should try sneak in for b8?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/robotlegs/robotlegs-framework/issues/107#issuecomment-18921714 .

Sent from Gmail Mobile

creynders commented 11 years ago

Wait, maybe I should push the getProviderFor first? No?

darscan commented 11 years ago

Not yet. I think we should try get Swiftsuspenders into the RL org first.

creynders commented 11 years ago

Some minor points:

  1. mvcsBundle.Command and Mediator shouldn't they be moved to a impl package?
  2. I assume we're going to include DirectCommandMapExtension into the MVCSBundle?
  3. No readme for LocalEventMapExtension
  4. Can't we really think of anything better for the matching package? It looks so ... orphaned ...
  5. Shouldn't we add a Actor into MVCSBundle ?
creynders commented 11 years ago

About 4. I think I'd like it better if it's in robotlegs.bender or robotlegs.bender.framework

platformane commented 11 years ago

I think i don't need a Actor. The IEventDispatcher is more flexible.

darscan commented 11 years ago

Good points.

  1. I suppose it just doesn't seem necessary - there will never be any api package, so why nest things in impl.
  2. I'm still on the fence about including DirectCommandMap in the MVCS Bundle. Not because I don't like it, but just because MVCS is supposed to be "classic" (RL1ish), and the DCM seems quite different. I'm not too fussy.
  3. We should add that.
  4. Yeh.. the matching package. The thing is that nothing inside the framework depends on the "advanced" matching stuff. The framework itself has a much simpler matching API.
  5. I found that the existence of Actor hid the fact that anything can be an "Actor". My hope is that by removing it people will learn that their Model and Services don't have to be sub-classes and can just have dependencies injected as usual.
creynders commented 11 years ago

1/ Symmetry? Cleaner? It's more clear what the installation fixture is? 2/ It is functionality that existed in v1: CommandMap#execute, CommandMap#detain and CommandMap#release 4/ That doesn't matter IMO; the framework facilitates. It would only matter if we'd plan on releasing the framework package as a separate swc/rsl. 5/ Yeah, I hear you. I just anticipate the question and also, it does provide some convenience with event dispatching.

darscan commented 11 years ago

1/ But I like how it currently looks. Symmetry be damned ;) No, I'm just kidding. Still, I think it's ok. I could be convinced.

2/ True that, lets bring it in.

4/ I can not be convinced.

5/ Hmm.. I could be convinced.

creynders commented 11 years ago

1/ [...] I could be convinced.

But HOW? For the love of God, how?! Tell me! No, it's ok I suppose.

4/ how 'bout bribes? I have a lovely cuckoo clock that will make you the life of the party at any Oktoberfest inspired soiree.