[DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
179 messages Options
123456789
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Harbs
Unless there are objections, I propose we continue the vote for the project name and we can have a separate discussion once the new project is formed on what to name the product.

I don’t think we should rush into the decision on the product, but the project name is more time critical and has less marketing impact.

Does that sound like a plan?

Harbs

> On Sep 15, 2017, at 12:42 AM, Piotr Zarzycki <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Guys,
>
> Reading Justin's thoughts we should really consider all of that. We can
> loose a lot of already gathered attention even if Carlos will put effort
> for new brand.
>
> +1 for having Product Name as FlexJS. That would be the bridge which can
> hold us.
>
> Piotr
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017, 23:31 Peter Ent <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> If the project name were to be "Apache Royale" and produced FlexJS, and
>> the Apache Royale web page/wiki referenced FlexJS and made it available
>> for Google searches, then anyone who was interested in or heard about
>> FlexJS and searched for "FlexJS" (or "Flex" or "Adobe Flex" or "Apache
>> Flex" or "ActionScript Flex" or <etc>), they should get a link to Apache
>> Royale in their search results. The blurb that accompanies the search
>> result should mention FlexJS. I think that would be enough to pique
>> interest and get a click.
>>
>> Substitute "Royale" for whatever name you'd like the project to be called.
>>
>> ‹peter
>>
>> On 9/14/17, 5:16 PM, "Harbs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> It¹s great to have another perspective on this.
>>>
>>> Some of these issues can be addressed by SEO.
>>>
>>> It could be that we should be careful about changing names, and / or
>>> timing of changing names.
>>>
>>> Alex does make a good point that the project name does not need to be the
>>> same as the product name. It might make sense to keep the product as
>>> FlexJS for now at least and just pick a different project name. The
>>> product name is easier to change than the project name and a project can
>>> have more than one product.
>>>
>>> If I would pick a reference to a product which did a major rebranding to
>>> drop associations to old technology it would be Xojo. I¹m not sure how
>>> many here are familiar with it, but it used to be call REALBasic. A few
>>> years back they rebranded as Xojo. I don¹t think it made much of a
>>> difference to the folks using it. I have no idea if it helped them or not.
>>>
>>> Harbs
>>>
>>>> On Sep 14, 2017, at 11:07 PM, Justin M. Hill <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I am not someone with an official vote, but I wanted to express my
>>>> concern
>>>> about ditching the FlexJS name.
>>>>
>>>> The largest possible market for adoption of a new "javascript" solution
>>>> is
>>>> to go after those who have stuck with Flex.   There are FAR too many
>>>> javascript solutions on the market right now.
>>>>
>>>> If the vote is to change the name, this will:
>>>>
>>>> -- confuse the people who have been patiently waiting for FlexJS to get
>>>> to
>>>> 1.0 so they can dive in.
>>>>
>>>> -- get lost in the noise of all of the other far more well popularized
>>>> javascript frameworks like Angular, React, etc.
>>>>
>>>> -- lose the feeling, however small it may be, that those who came from
>>>> the
>>>> Flex background can expect to have some of their knowledge recycled.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> These are 3 critical aspects in terms of raising awareness and having a
>>>> potentially devoted following of one technology (Flex) star to
>>>> transition
>>>> and champion to a new one (FlexJS).
>>>>
>>>> If we lose that, then we effectively have to target against ALL
>>>> javascript
>>>> frameworks, most notably ones that are heavily entrenched already and
>>>> supported by giant company resources like Google and Facebook.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am strongly opposed to a name change.  I think this would be a huge
>>>> mistake.
>>>>
>>>> On top of that, picking a new name and gaining awareness of it is HARD.
>>>>
>>>> It should be reason enough for the Apache powers-that-be to approve a
>>>> project change to avoid being stuck with a huge legacy Flex bugbase that
>>>> Adobe donated, and instead start fresh with our 1.0 name.
>>>>
>>>> If that cannot be achieved, then at a bare minimum we should seek to
>>>> keep
>>>> the name FlexJS.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regarding targeting something other than Javascript -- like SWF or AIR
>>>> -- I
>>>> realize the debug aspect benefits are important, but all this is going
>>>> to
>>>> do is confuse people.
>>>>
>>>> I have read about HaXe a dozen times, and I never understand what it
>>>> does
>>>> because apparently it does too much.   A swiss army knife is a lot more
>>>> confusing to use then a fixed head screwdriver.
>>>>
>>>> Please, we have spent SO much time trying to get to 1.0 -- lets get
>>>> FOCUSED
>>>> on delivering what everyone outside of the community of active
>>>> participants
>>>> here has been waiting on, which is a future direction for their Flex
>>>> efforts.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>> Justin Hill
>>>>
>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FProminic
>> .
>>>> NET&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce3d4e33b77f840be8d2b08d4fbb5d605%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344387
>>>> 94aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636410205784877857&sdata=cw5LAiH6bOvULqdsdx4NL
>>>> GWNUawI58dy%2F4fqTI5aCaM%3D&reserved=0 | Skype: JustinProminic
>>>>
>>>> My Apache Flex community contribution is working on the open
>>>> source Moonshine-IDE.com for FlexJS.
>>>
>>
>>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

OmPrakash Muppirala
In my view, the biggest reason for a fork is to get away from the name Flex.

In terms of familiarity, show a few lines of MXML code to current Flex
developers, they will immediately recognize it.

The same way that I recognize JQuery if I see the $ symbol or AngularJS
when I see ng-something.

My point is, if we can have a big snippet of MXML on our home page, SEO for
flex, flejs, actionscript, mxml, etc, we should be able to cover existing
Flex users.

For getting new users, IMHO, we must must get rid of the word Flex.  Once
someone comes in based on curiosity, we need to ensure that they like what
they see, namely ease of setup, ease of use, features support, etc.

Thanks,
Om

On Sep 14, 2017 3:36 PM, "Harbs" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Unless there are objections, I propose we continue the vote for the
> project name and we can have a separate discussion once the new project is
> formed on what to name the product.
>
> I don’t think we should rush into the decision on the product, but the
> project name is more time critical and has less marketing impact.
>
> Does that sound like a plan?
>
> Harbs
>
> > On Sep 15, 2017, at 12:42 AM, Piotr Zarzycki <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Guys,
> >
> > Reading Justin's thoughts we should really consider all of that. We can
> > loose a lot of already gathered attention even if Carlos will put effort
> > for new brand.
> >
> > +1 for having Product Name as FlexJS. That would be the bridge which can
> > hold us.
> >
> > Piotr
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017, 23:31 Peter Ent <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> If the project name were to be "Apache Royale" and produced FlexJS, and
> >> the Apache Royale web page/wiki referenced FlexJS and made it available
> >> for Google searches, then anyone who was interested in or heard about
> >> FlexJS and searched for "FlexJS" (or "Flex" or "Adobe Flex" or "Apache
> >> Flex" or "ActionScript Flex" or <etc>), they should get a link to Apache
> >> Royale in their search results. The blurb that accompanies the search
> >> result should mention FlexJS. I think that would be enough to pique
> >> interest and get a click.
> >>
> >> Substitute "Royale" for whatever name you'd like the project to be
> called.
> >>
> >> ‹peter
> >>
> >> On 9/14/17, 5:16 PM, "Harbs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It¹s great to have another perspective on this.
> >>>
> >>> Some of these issues can be addressed by SEO.
> >>>
> >>> It could be that we should be careful about changing names, and / or
> >>> timing of changing names.
> >>>
> >>> Alex does make a good point that the project name does not need to be
> the
> >>> same as the product name. It might make sense to keep the product as
> >>> FlexJS for now at least and just pick a different project name. The
> >>> product name is easier to change than the project name and a project
> can
> >>> have more than one product.
> >>>
> >>> If I would pick a reference to a product which did a major rebranding
> to
> >>> drop associations to old technology it would be Xojo. I¹m not sure how
> >>> many here are familiar with it, but it used to be call REALBasic. A few
> >>> years back they rebranded as Xojo. I don¹t think it made much of a
> >>> difference to the folks using it. I have no idea if it helped them or
> not.
> >>>
> >>> Harbs
> >>>
> >>>> On Sep 14, 2017, at 11:07 PM, Justin M. Hill <[hidden email]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi everyone,
> >>>>
> >>>> I am not someone with an official vote, but I wanted to express my
> >>>> concern
> >>>> about ditching the FlexJS name.
> >>>>
> >>>> The largest possible market for adoption of a new "javascript"
> solution
> >>>> is
> >>>> to go after those who have stuck with Flex.   There are FAR too many
> >>>> javascript solutions on the market right now.
> >>>>
> >>>> If the vote is to change the name, this will:
> >>>>
> >>>> -- confuse the people who have been patiently waiting for FlexJS to
> get
> >>>> to
> >>>> 1.0 so they can dive in.
> >>>>
> >>>> -- get lost in the noise of all of the other far more well popularized
> >>>> javascript frameworks like Angular, React, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> -- lose the feeling, however small it may be, that those who came from
> >>>> the
> >>>> Flex background can expect to have some of their knowledge recycled.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> These are 3 critical aspects in terms of raising awareness and having
> a
> >>>> potentially devoted following of one technology (Flex) star to
> >>>> transition
> >>>> and champion to a new one (FlexJS).
> >>>>
> >>>> If we lose that, then we effectively have to target against ALL
> >>>> javascript
> >>>> frameworks, most notably ones that are heavily entrenched already and
> >>>> supported by giant company resources like Google and Facebook.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I am strongly opposed to a name change.  I think this would be a huge
> >>>> mistake.
> >>>>
> >>>> On top of that, picking a new name and gaining awareness of it is
> HARD.
> >>>>
> >>>> It should be reason enough for the Apache powers-that-be to approve a
> >>>> project change to avoid being stuck with a huge legacy Flex bugbase
> that
> >>>> Adobe donated, and instead start fresh with our 1.0 name.
> >>>>
> >>>> If that cannot be achieved, then at a bare minimum we should seek to
> >>>> keep
> >>>> the name FlexJS.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Regarding targeting something other than Javascript -- like SWF or AIR
> >>>> -- I
> >>>> realize the debug aspect benefits are important, but all this is going
> >>>> to
> >>>> do is confuse people.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have read about HaXe a dozen times, and I never understand what it
> >>>> does
> >>>> because apparently it does too much.   A swiss army knife is a lot
> more
> >>>> confusing to use then a fixed head screwdriver.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please, we have spent SO much time trying to get to 1.0 -- lets get
> >>>> FOCUSED
> >>>> on delivering what everyone outside of the community of active
> >>>> participants
> >>>> here has been waiting on, which is a future direction for their Flex
> >>>> efforts.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you,
> >>>>
> >>>> Justin Hill
> >>>>
> >>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2FProminic
> >> .
> >>>> NET&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce3d4e33b77f840be8d2b08d4fbb5
> d605%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344387
> >>>> 94aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636410205784877857&sdata=
> cw5LAiH6bOvULqdsdx4NL
> >>>> GWNUawI58dy%2F4fqTI5aCaM%3D&reserved=0 | Skype: JustinProminic
> >>>>
> >>>> My Apache Flex community contribution is working on the open
> >>>> source Moonshine-IDE.com for FlexJS.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Alex Harui-2
I agree that for getting new users who don't already know about Flex, that
having a name without Flex in it would be best.  But I think Justin Hill
is saying, and I share his concern, that folks who are sitting on a Flex
app and thinking about migrating might be more attracted to a product
named FlexJS than some name without Flex in it.

Further, I think we might want to have one product for the migrating Flex
customer and another for someone coming in without Flex background.  The
getting started documentation might be different.  One would leverage
existing knowledge of MXML and AS and draw comparisons between Flex and
FlexJS.  Just about all migrating Flex customers don't need as much detail
on what RemoteObject and AMF is, for example.  But a new person without
Flex background may not even be interested in RemoteObject.  We could put
RemoteObject support in its own SWC and not ship that SWC in a package
that targets folks who don't know Flex.  The release package for folks
without Flex background may not mention Flash Builder at all or contain
the Flash Builder integration modules, launch configs, and  documentation.
 It may not even support any other IDEs other than VSCode and maybe
Moonshine.

I'm still trying to finish up build scripts that create a non-Adobe
release package.  Once I get that done, I can try creating a different
non-Adobe release package that isn't a valid Flash Builder SDK and doesn't
contain any Flash Builder support and make sure it works with VSCode and
see if the Moonshine folks want to support it and what we would need to
change to make it work.  And that package without Flash Builder support
could have the same name as the Project, but the other package that
supports other Flex IDEs could still be called FlexJS.

This is why I proposed what I did last night:
-Project name: Royale
-Product name for folks who don't know Flex: Royale
-Product name for folks who do know Flex: FlexJS

Thoughts?
-Alex

On 9/14/17, 3:59 PM, "[hidden email] on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
<[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:

>In my view, the biggest reason for a fork is to get away from the name
>Flex.
>
>In terms of familiarity, show a few lines of MXML code to current Flex
>developers, they will immediately recognize it.
>
>The same way that I recognize JQuery if I see the $ symbol or AngularJS
>when I see ng-something.
>
>My point is, if we can have a big snippet of MXML on our home page, SEO
>for
>flex, flejs, actionscript, mxml, etc, we should be able to cover existing
>Flex users.
>
>For getting new users, IMHO, we must must get rid of the word Flex.  Once
>someone comes in based on curiosity, we need to ensure that they like what
>they see, namely ease of setup, ease of use, features support, etc.
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>On Sep 14, 2017 3:36 PM, "Harbs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Unless there are objections, I propose we continue the vote for the
>> project name and we can have a separate discussion once the new project
>>is
>> formed on what to name the product.
>>
>> I don’t think we should rush into the decision on the product, but the
>> project name is more time critical and has less marketing impact.
>>
>> Does that sound like a plan?
>>
>> Harbs
>>
>> > On Sep 15, 2017, at 12:42 AM, Piotr Zarzycki
>><[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Guys,
>> >
>> > Reading Justin's thoughts we should really consider all of that. We
>>can
>> > loose a lot of already gathered attention even if Carlos will put
>>effort
>> > for new brand.
>> >
>> > +1 for having Product Name as FlexJS. That would be the bridge which
>>can
>> > hold us.
>> >
>> > Piotr
>> >
>> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017, 23:31 Peter Ent <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> If the project name were to be "Apache Royale" and produced FlexJS,
>>and
>> >> the Apache Royale web page/wiki referenced FlexJS and made it
>>available
>> >> for Google searches, then anyone who was interested in or heard about
>> >> FlexJS and searched for "FlexJS" (or "Flex" or "Adobe Flex" or
>>"Apache
>> >> Flex" or "ActionScript Flex" or <etc>), they should get a link to
>>Apache
>> >> Royale in their search results. The blurb that accompanies the search
>> >> result should mention FlexJS. I think that would be enough to pique
>> >> interest and get a click.
>> >>
>> >> Substitute "Royale" for whatever name you'd like the project to be
>> called.
>> >>
>> >> ‹peter
>> >>
>> >> On 9/14/17, 5:16 PM, "Harbs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> It¹s great to have another perspective on this.
>> >>>
>> >>> Some of these issues can be addressed by SEO.
>> >>>
>> >>> It could be that we should be careful about changing names, and / or
>> >>> timing of changing names.
>> >>>
>> >>> Alex does make a good point that the project name does not need to
>>be
>> the
>> >>> same as the product name. It might make sense to keep the product as
>> >>> FlexJS for now at least and just pick a different project name. The
>> >>> product name is easier to change than the project name and a project
>> can
>> >>> have more than one product.
>> >>>
>> >>> If I would pick a reference to a product which did a major
>>rebranding
>> to
>> >>> drop associations to old technology it would be Xojo. I¹m not sure
>>how
>> >>> many here are familiar with it, but it used to be call REALBasic. A
>>few
>> >>> years back they rebranded as Xojo. I don¹t think it made much of a
>> >>> difference to the folks using it. I have no idea if it helped them
>>or
>> not.
>> >>>
>> >>> Harbs
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Sep 14, 2017, at 11:07 PM, Justin M. Hill <[hidden email]>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hi everyone,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I am not someone with an official vote, but I wanted to express my
>> >>>> concern
>> >>>> about ditching the FlexJS name.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The largest possible market for adoption of a new "javascript"
>> solution
>> >>>> is
>> >>>> to go after those who have stuck with Flex.   There are FAR too
>>many
>> >>>> javascript solutions on the market right now.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If the vote is to change the name, this will:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -- confuse the people who have been patiently waiting for FlexJS to
>> get
>> >>>> to
>> >>>> 1.0 so they can dive in.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -- get lost in the noise of all of the other far more well
>>popularized
>> >>>> javascript frameworks like Angular, React, etc.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> -- lose the feeling, however small it may be, that those who came
>>from
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> Flex background can expect to have some of their knowledge
>>recycled.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> These are 3 critical aspects in terms of raising awareness and
>>having
>> a
>> >>>> potentially devoted following of one technology (Flex) star to
>> >>>> transition
>> >>>> and champion to a new one (FlexJS).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If we lose that, then we effectively have to target against ALL
>> >>>> javascript
>> >>>> frameworks, most notably ones that are heavily entrenched already
>>and
>> >>>> supported by giant company resources like Google and Facebook.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I am strongly opposed to a name change.  I think this would be a
>>huge
>> >>>> mistake.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On top of that, picking a new name and gaining awareness of it is
>> HARD.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It should be reason enough for the Apache powers-that-be to
>>approve a
>> >>>> project change to avoid being stuck with a huge legacy Flex bugbase
>> that
>> >>>> Adobe donated, and instead start fresh with our 1.0 name.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If that cannot be achieved, then at a bare minimum we should seek
>>to
>> >>>> keep
>> >>>> the name FlexJS.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Regarding targeting something other than Javascript -- like SWF or
>>AIR
>> >>>> -- I
>> >>>> realize the debug aspect benefits are important, but all this is
>>going
>> >>>> to
>> >>>> do is confuse people.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I have read about HaXe a dozen times, and I never understand what
>>it
>> >>>> does
>> >>>> because apparently it does too much.   A swiss army knife is a lot
>> more
>> >>>> confusing to use then a fixed head screwdriver.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Please, we have spent SO much time trying to get to 1.0 -- lets get
>> >>>> FOCUSED
>> >>>> on delivering what everyone outside of the community of active
>> >>>> participants
>> >>>> here has been waiting on, which is a future direction for their
>>Flex
>> >>>> efforts.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thank you,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Justin Hill
>> >>>>
>> >>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> http%3A%2F%2FProminic
>> >> .
>> >>>> NET&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce3d4e33b77f840be8d2b08d4fbb5
>> d605%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344387
>> >>>> 94aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636410205784877857&sdata=
>> cw5LAiH6bOvULqdsdx4NL
>> >>>> GWNUawI58dy%2F4fqTI5aCaM%3D&reserved=0 | Skype: JustinProminic
>> >>>>
>> >>>> My Apache Flex community contribution is working on the open
>> >>>> source Moonshine-IDE.com for FlexJS.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

piotrz
I believe that's the idea which we should bring into the new project. Let's
be really specific about that on our page and we will not loose anything.

I would like to hear more whether Carlos in that shape would like to still
help with that by creating website etc.

I really don't want to put an mine energy on promoting stuff more than now.
I would like to still have some rings calling FlexJS name.

Piotr

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017, 02:05 Alex Harui <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I agree that for getting new users who don't already know about Flex, that
> having a name without Flex in it would be best.  But I think Justin Hill
> is saying, and I share his concern, that folks who are sitting on a Flex
> app and thinking about migrating might be more attracted to a product
> named FlexJS than some name without Flex in it.
>
> Further, I think we might want to have one product for the migrating Flex
> customer and another for someone coming in without Flex background.  The
> getting started documentation might be different.  One would leverage
> existing knowledge of MXML and AS and draw comparisons between Flex and
> FlexJS.  Just about all migrating Flex customers don't need as much detail
> on what RemoteObject and AMF is, for example.  But a new person without
> Flex background may not even be interested in RemoteObject.  We could put
> RemoteObject support in its own SWC and not ship that SWC in a package
> that targets folks who don't know Flex.  The release package for folks
> without Flex background may not mention Flash Builder at all or contain
> the Flash Builder integration modules, launch configs, and  documentation.
>  It may not even support any other IDEs other than VSCode and maybe
> Moonshine.
>
> I'm still trying to finish up build scripts that create a non-Adobe
> release package.  Once I get that done, I can try creating a different
> non-Adobe release package that isn't a valid Flash Builder SDK and doesn't
> contain any Flash Builder support and make sure it works with VSCode and
> see if the Moonshine folks want to support it and what we would need to
> change to make it work.  And that package without Flash Builder support
> could have the same name as the Project, but the other package that
> supports other Flex IDEs could still be called FlexJS.
>
> This is why I proposed what I did last night:
> -Project name: Royale
> -Product name for folks who don't know Flex: Royale
> -Product name for folks who do know Flex: FlexJS
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
> On 9/14/17, 3:59 PM, "[hidden email] on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
> <[hidden email] on behalf of [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >In my view, the biggest reason for a fork is to get away from the name
> >Flex.
> >
> >In terms of familiarity, show a few lines of MXML code to current Flex
> >developers, they will immediately recognize it.
> >
> >The same way that I recognize JQuery if I see the $ symbol or AngularJS
> >when I see ng-something.
> >
> >My point is, if we can have a big snippet of MXML on our home page, SEO
> >for
> >flex, flejs, actionscript, mxml, etc, we should be able to cover existing
> >Flex users.
> >
> >For getting new users, IMHO, we must must get rid of the word Flex.  Once
> >someone comes in based on curiosity, we need to ensure that they like what
> >they see, namely ease of setup, ease of use, features support, etc.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Om
> >
> >On Sep 14, 2017 3:36 PM, "Harbs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> Unless there are objections, I propose we continue the vote for the
> >> project name and we can have a separate discussion once the new project
> >>is
> >> formed on what to name the product.
> >>
> >> I don’t think we should rush into the decision on the product, but the
> >> project name is more time critical and has less marketing impact.
> >>
> >> Does that sound like a plan?
> >>
> >> Harbs
> >>
> >> > On Sep 15, 2017, at 12:42 AM, Piotr Zarzycki
> >><[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Guys,
> >> >
> >> > Reading Justin's thoughts we should really consider all of that. We
> >>can
> >> > loose a lot of already gathered attention even if Carlos will put
> >>effort
> >> > for new brand.
> >> >
> >> > +1 for having Product Name as FlexJS. That would be the bridge which
> >>can
> >> > hold us.
> >> >
> >> > Piotr
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017, 23:31 Peter Ent <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> If the project name were to be "Apache Royale" and produced FlexJS,
> >>and
> >> >> the Apache Royale web page/wiki referenced FlexJS and made it
> >>available
> >> >> for Google searches, then anyone who was interested in or heard about
> >> >> FlexJS and searched for "FlexJS" (or "Flex" or "Adobe Flex" or
> >>"Apache
> >> >> Flex" or "ActionScript Flex" or <etc>), they should get a link to
> >>Apache
> >> >> Royale in their search results. The blurb that accompanies the search
> >> >> result should mention FlexJS. I think that would be enough to pique
> >> >> interest and get a click.
> >> >>
> >> >> Substitute "Royale" for whatever name you'd like the project to be
> >> called.
> >> >>
> >> >> ‹peter
> >> >>
> >> >> On 9/14/17, 5:16 PM, "Harbs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> It¹s great to have another perspective on this.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Some of these issues can be addressed by SEO.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> It could be that we should be careful about changing names, and / or
> >> >>> timing of changing names.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Alex does make a good point that the project name does not need to
> >>be
> >> the
> >> >>> same as the product name. It might make sense to keep the product as
> >> >>> FlexJS for now at least and just pick a different project name. The
> >> >>> product name is easier to change than the project name and a project
> >> can
> >> >>> have more than one product.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> If I would pick a reference to a product which did a major
> >>rebranding
> >> to
> >> >>> drop associations to old technology it would be Xojo. I¹m not sure
> >>how
> >> >>> many here are familiar with it, but it used to be call REALBasic. A
> >>few
> >> >>> years back they rebranded as Xojo. I don¹t think it made much of a
> >> >>> difference to the folks using it. I have no idea if it helped them
> >>or
> >> not.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Harbs
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> On Sep 14, 2017, at 11:07 PM, Justin M. Hill <[hidden email]>
> >> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Hi everyone,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I am not someone with an official vote, but I wanted to express my
> >> >>>> concern
> >> >>>> about ditching the FlexJS name.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> The largest possible market for adoption of a new "javascript"
> >> solution
> >> >>>> is
> >> >>>> to go after those who have stuck with Flex.   There are FAR too
> >>many
> >> >>>> javascript solutions on the market right now.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> If the vote is to change the name, this will:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> -- confuse the people who have been patiently waiting for FlexJS to
> >> get
> >> >>>> to
> >> >>>> 1.0 so they can dive in.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> -- get lost in the noise of all of the other far more well
> >>popularized
> >> >>>> javascript frameworks like Angular, React, etc.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> -- lose the feeling, however small it may be, that those who came
> >>from
> >> >>>> the
> >> >>>> Flex background can expect to have some of their knowledge
> >>recycled.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> These are 3 critical aspects in terms of raising awareness and
> >>having
> >> a
> >> >>>> potentially devoted following of one technology (Flex) star to
> >> >>>> transition
> >> >>>> and champion to a new one (FlexJS).
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> If we lose that, then we effectively have to target against ALL
> >> >>>> javascript
> >> >>>> frameworks, most notably ones that are heavily entrenched already
> >>and
> >> >>>> supported by giant company resources like Google and Facebook.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I am strongly opposed to a name change.  I think this would be a
> >>huge
> >> >>>> mistake.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> On top of that, picking a new name and gaining awareness of it is
> >> HARD.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> It should be reason enough for the Apache powers-that-be to
> >>approve a
> >> >>>> project change to avoid being stuck with a huge legacy Flex bugbase
> >> that
> >> >>>> Adobe donated, and instead start fresh with our 1.0 name.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> If that cannot be achieved, then at a bare minimum we should seek
> >>to
> >> >>>> keep
> >> >>>> the name FlexJS.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Regarding targeting something other than Javascript -- like SWF or
> >>AIR
> >> >>>> -- I
> >> >>>> realize the debug aspect benefits are important, but all this is
> >>going
> >> >>>> to
> >> >>>> do is confuse people.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I have read about HaXe a dozen times, and I never understand what
> >>it
> >> >>>> does
> >> >>>> because apparently it does too much.   A swiss army knife is a lot
> >> more
> >> >>>> confusing to use then a fixed head screwdriver.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Please, we have spent SO much time trying to get to 1.0 -- lets get
> >> >>>> FOCUSED
> >> >>>> on delivering what everyone outside of the community of active
> >> >>>> participants
> >> >>>> here has been waiting on, which is a future direction for their
> >>Flex
> >> >>>> efforts.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Thank you,
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Justin Hill
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> http%3A%2F%2FProminic
> >> >> .
> >> >>>> NET&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce3d4e33b77f840be8d2b08d4fbb5
> >> d605%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344387
> >> >>>> 94aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636410205784877857&sdata=
> >> cw5LAiH6bOvULqdsdx4NL
> >> >>>> GWNUawI58dy%2F4fqTI5aCaM%3D&reserved=0 | Skype: JustinProminic
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> My Apache Flex community contribution is working on the open
> >> >>>> source Moonshine-IDE.com for FlexJS.
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

piotrz
In reply to this post by Harbs
For me it is definitly start like a plan. It would be good in the vote
mention that we may stay with FlexJS name as an Product - To be discussed -
even voted.

Thoughts?

Piotr

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017, 00:36 Harbs <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Unless there are objections, I propose we continue the vote for the
> project name and we can have a separate discussion once the new project is
> formed on what to name the product.
>
> I don’t think we should rush into the decision on the product, but the
> project name is more time critical and has less marketing impact.
>
> Does that sound like a plan?
>
> Harbs
>
> > On Sep 15, 2017, at 12:42 AM, Piotr Zarzycki <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > Guys,
> >
> > Reading Justin's thoughts we should really consider all of that. We can
> > loose a lot of already gathered attention even if Carlos will put effort
> > for new brand.
> >
> > +1 for having Product Name as FlexJS. That would be the bridge which can
> > hold us.
> >
> > Piotr
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017, 23:31 Peter Ent <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >> If the project name were to be "Apache Royale" and produced FlexJS, and
> >> the Apache Royale web page/wiki referenced FlexJS and made it available
> >> for Google searches, then anyone who was interested in or heard about
> >> FlexJS and searched for "FlexJS" (or "Flex" or "Adobe Flex" or "Apache
> >> Flex" or "ActionScript Flex" or <etc>), they should get a link to Apache
> >> Royale in their search results. The blurb that accompanies the search
> >> result should mention FlexJS. I think that would be enough to pique
> >> interest and get a click.
> >>
> >> Substitute "Royale" for whatever name you'd like the project to be
> called.
> >>
> >> ‹peter
> >>
> >> On 9/14/17, 5:16 PM, "Harbs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It¹s great to have another perspective on this.
> >>>
> >>> Some of these issues can be addressed by SEO.
> >>>
> >>> It could be that we should be careful about changing names, and / or
> >>> timing of changing names.
> >>>
> >>> Alex does make a good point that the project name does not need to be
> the
> >>> same as the product name. It might make sense to keep the product as
> >>> FlexJS for now at least and just pick a different project name. The
> >>> product name is easier to change than the project name and a project
> can
> >>> have more than one product.
> >>>
> >>> If I would pick a reference to a product which did a major rebranding
> to
> >>> drop associations to old technology it would be Xojo. I¹m not sure how
> >>> many here are familiar with it, but it used to be call REALBasic. A few
> >>> years back they rebranded as Xojo. I don¹t think it made much of a
> >>> difference to the folks using it. I have no idea if it helped them or
> not.
> >>>
> >>> Harbs
> >>>
> >>>> On Sep 14, 2017, at 11:07 PM, Justin M. Hill <[hidden email]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi everyone,
> >>>>
> >>>> I am not someone with an official vote, but I wanted to express my
> >>>> concern
> >>>> about ditching the FlexJS name.
> >>>>
> >>>> The largest possible market for adoption of a new "javascript"
> solution
> >>>> is
> >>>> to go after those who have stuck with Flex.   There are FAR too many
> >>>> javascript solutions on the market right now.
> >>>>
> >>>> If the vote is to change the name, this will:
> >>>>
> >>>> -- confuse the people who have been patiently waiting for FlexJS to
> get
> >>>> to
> >>>> 1.0 so they can dive in.
> >>>>
> >>>> -- get lost in the noise of all of the other far more well popularized
> >>>> javascript frameworks like Angular, React, etc.
> >>>>
> >>>> -- lose the feeling, however small it may be, that those who came from
> >>>> the
> >>>> Flex background can expect to have some of their knowledge recycled.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> These are 3 critical aspects in terms of raising awareness and having
> a
> >>>> potentially devoted following of one technology (Flex) star to
> >>>> transition
> >>>> and champion to a new one (FlexJS).
> >>>>
> >>>> If we lose that, then we effectively have to target against ALL
> >>>> javascript
> >>>> frameworks, most notably ones that are heavily entrenched already and
> >>>> supported by giant company resources like Google and Facebook.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I am strongly opposed to a name change.  I think this would be a huge
> >>>> mistake.
> >>>>
> >>>> On top of that, picking a new name and gaining awareness of it is
> HARD.
> >>>>
> >>>> It should be reason enough for the Apache powers-that-be to approve a
> >>>> project change to avoid being stuck with a huge legacy Flex bugbase
> that
> >>>> Adobe donated, and instead start fresh with our 1.0 name.
> >>>>
> >>>> If that cannot be achieved, then at a bare minimum we should seek to
> >>>> keep
> >>>> the name FlexJS.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Regarding targeting something other than Javascript -- like SWF or AIR
> >>>> -- I
> >>>> realize the debug aspect benefits are important, but all this is going
> >>>> to
> >>>> do is confuse people.
> >>>>
> >>>> I have read about HaXe a dozen times, and I never understand what it
> >>>> does
> >>>> because apparently it does too much.   A swiss army knife is a lot
> more
> >>>> confusing to use then a fixed head screwdriver.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please, we have spent SO much time trying to get to 1.0 -- lets get
> >>>> FOCUSED
> >>>> on delivering what everyone outside of the community of active
> >>>> participants
> >>>> here has been waiting on, which is a future direction for their Flex
> >>>> efforts.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you,
> >>>>
> >>>> Justin Hill
> >>>>
> >>>>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2FProminic
> >> .
> >>>>
> NET&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce3d4e33b77f840be8d2b08d4fbb5d605%7Cfa7b1b5a7b344387
> >>>>
> 94aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636410205784877857&sdata=cw5LAiH6bOvULqdsdx4NL
> >>>> GWNUawI58dy%2F4fqTI5aCaM%3D&reserved=0 | Skype: JustinProminic
> >>>>
> >>>> My Apache Flex community contribution is working on the open
> >>>> source Moonshine-IDE.com for FlexJS.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Harbs
In reply to this post by Alex Harui-2
So same product but marketed with two different names?

Kind of odd, but an interesting approach. It might have merit.

I’d like to sit on this idea. I’m not yet sure how I feel about it.

Harbs

> On Sep 15, 2017, at 3:04 AM, Alex Harui <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> This is why I proposed what I did last night:
> -Project name: Royale
> -Product name for folks who don't know Flex: Royale
> -Product name for folks who do know Flex: FlexJS

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Alex Harui-2
It may not be the same bits.  I think it would be two different packages.
There might be different defaults, there is no need for Flash Builder
support in the product that isn't called FlexJS so we may not ship those
files or mention Flash Builder in the doc.

-Alex

On 9/14/17, 11:01 PM, "Harbs" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>So same product but marketed with two different names?
>
>Kind of odd, but an interesting approach. It might have merit.
>
>I’d like to sit on this idea. I’m not yet sure how I feel about it.
>
>Harbs
>
>> On Sep 15, 2017, at 3:04 AM, Alex Harui <[hidden email]>
>>wrote:
>>
>> This is why I proposed what I did last night:
>> -Project name: Royale
>> -Product name for folks who don't know Flex: Royale
>> -Product name for folks who do know Flex: FlexJS
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Olaf Krueger
In reply to this post by Harbs
>So same product but marketed with two different names?

I think this is what we see in the real world all the time:
Identical products are optimized (under different names) for local markets
or special target groups to satisfy the needs of consumers.

Sounds like a reasonable way to reach as many people as possible but it also
means some more effort and there is a risk of confusing the people

Thanks,
Olaf





--
Sent from: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

piotrz
I'm willing to change my VOTE to Yes if there will be no help from Carlos
if we will have Project Name: Royale, but ship product name: FlexJS. Sorry
but we really have to have real help if it is even going to happen.

Thanks,
Piotr

2017-09-15 8:36 GMT+02:00 Olaf Krueger <[hidden email]>:

> >So same product but marketed with two different names?
>
> I think this is what we see in the real world all the time:
> Identical products are optimized (under different names) for local markets
> or special target groups to satisfy the needs of consumers.
>
> Sounds like a reasonable way to reach as many people as possible but it
> also
> means some more effort and there is a risk of confusing the people
>
> Thanks,
> Olaf
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/
>



--

Piotr Zarzycki

mobile: +48 880 859 557
skype: zarzycki10

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
<https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Olaf Krueger
Hi,

This was posted by Chris at the [VOTE] thread
>and I know what getting rid of "flex" everywhere inside the project would
mean regarding refactoring and >tool support.

I thought that for now we just vote for a new project name in order to get
rid of the word 'Flex' within the Apache project name.
Hence I thought that there's no urgent need to replace the occurrence of the
word 'flex' throughout the entire codebase.
I think that there are a lot of projects out there which were renamed and
still contains old names in their codebase.

Do I misunderstand something?

Thanks,
Olaf





--
Sent from: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Harbs
I agree.

Let’s finish the vote on the project name and we can discuss the product (or products) name(s) later.

I think we should start the vote on the new name options. I’m not sure what the best format of such a vote should be. We need a culled list of options and way of tallying up opinions. Suggestions?

I think we should start with everyone putting forward their favorites of the options mentioned. Once we have that, we can compile the list of options and start a vote.

Harbs

> On Sep 15, 2017, at 10:28 AM, Olaf Krueger <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> This was posted by Chris at the [VOTE] thread
>> and I know what getting rid of "flex" everywhere inside the project would
> mean regarding refactoring and >tool support.
>
> I thought that for now we just vote for a new project name in order to get
> rid of the word 'Flex' within the Apache project name.
> Hence I thought that there's no urgent need to replace the occurrence of the
> word 'flex' throughout the entire codebase.
> I think that there are a lot of projects out there which were renamed and
> still contains old names in their codebase.
>
> Do I misunderstand something?
>
> Thanks,
> Olaf
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent from: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Olaf Krueger
In reply to this post by Olaf Krueger
Another idea to get out the naming dilemma could be to find a name for the
new project that still contains 'flex' but don't let you think of flex when
you read it the first time, e.g.:

...
Inflexion
Flexor
Flexure
...

Just a Scrabble exercise... ;-)

So people might be less confused if they find the word 'flex' in the
codebase.
Maybe current users and as well new users feel comfortable with such a name.

Just a thought...

Olaf



--
Sent from: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

piotrz
In reply to this post by Harbs
Harbs,

Agree to start another vote simultaneously. We have gathered proposition in
this email chain, if you could get all of them. VOTE could look like that:

+1 (Name from the list)
+1 (My proposition)

Does this sound ok ?

I'm looking into the code what would be the impact changing all the
resources to get rid of Flex name. - It look so far as an big amount of
work. The question is - Are we have to do this if the product name will
stay as FlexJS ?

Piotr


2017-09-15 9:49 GMT+02:00 Harbs <[hidden email]>:

> I agree.
>
> Let’s finish the vote on the project name and we can discuss the product
> (or products) name(s) later.
>
> I think we should start the vote on the new name options. I’m not sure
> what the best format of such a vote should be. We need a culled list of
> options and way of tallying up opinions. Suggestions?
>
> I think we should start with everyone putting forward their favorites of
> the options mentioned. Once we have that, we can compile the list of
> options and start a vote.
>
> Harbs
>
> > On Sep 15, 2017, at 10:28 AM, Olaf Krueger <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > This was posted by Chris at the [VOTE] thread
> >> and I know what getting rid of "flex" everywhere inside the project
> would
> > mean regarding refactoring and >tool support.
> >
> > I thought that for now we just vote for a new project name in order to
> get
> > rid of the word 'Flex' within the Apache project name.
> > Hence I thought that there's no urgent need to replace the occurrence of
> the
> > word 'flex' throughout the entire codebase.
> > I think that there are a lot of projects out there which were renamed and
> > still contains old names in their codebase.
> >
> > Do I misunderstand something?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Olaf
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/
>
>


--

Piotr Zarzycki

mobile: +48 880 859 557
skype: zarzycki10

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
<https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Olaf Krueger
Could we try to summarize all name proposals in order to build a single post
that contains all candidates (project names) before voting?
I think it's not so easy to extract all naming ideas from the different
threads/posts, I just remember a few.
What do you think of just creating a list of previous proposals and new ones
in reply to this post?:

- Royale
- Bend
- ...

Thanks,
Olaf



--
Sent from: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Kessler CTR Mark J
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher
I actually spilt some coffee on this one. Lol

-Mark K

-----Original Message-----
From: Erik de Bruin [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 1:26 PM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

BendForward...

(just kidding!)

EdB

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Kessler CTR Mark J
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher
I wanted to throw in a couple words / names to see if they "spark" anything.


Arise
Dawn
Raise / Rise

Dimension
Facet
Morph
Poly
Strand

Derive
Drive
Quest
Journey

Fortune
Prospect
Trend


-Mark K

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Carlos Rovira
Hi,

I'm with Om and others that one of the results we pursue with this renaming
is to avoid the "Flex" name. We talked about the problems we have today
with clients when "Flex" is put in a discussion. You pay in terms of
credibility to your client.

For migration : As a customer, I don't think migration is a real option.
FlexJS impose a very different code so almost all must be rewritten. You
only can think in maintain your languages (AS3/MXML) and environments (FB,
IDEA,...), so for me there's no much room there to discuss. I must say that
nowadays people like us considering to migrate would consider other actual
techs like Angular or React since the cost is similar and they get the
popular framework in 2017.

I see this renaming as a way to rebrand all our project and present it to
the world with new visuals and marketing. And try to compete in the same
terms they do. Same kind of name, same kind of website, and so on...

About Alex proposal to make different packages I think it could work, but
for me that would be a plan after rename, rebranding and website creation.
We can have it in mind for next steps after that. For me we need the same
top name for product and project, and then we can release a package for
people wanting to migrate called "apache XXX FlexJS" or something. But
consider that to make that real we will need people interested in make such
package and work for it. And consider how many people will be planing to
migrate from Flex and will find that FlexJS is completely different and
they can do it easily.

@Piotr, my plans will be to work (if people wants me on that) on: website,
logo design.... for me the motivation to work in that things is to get a
name that will make me think we can reach our goals, since if I don't
believe in a name will be complicated to give us a good work.
Far beyond that I always want to put work on the visuals of a component
design, I think we need that as we need the website and new name.





2017-09-15 13:17 GMT+02:00 Kessler CTR Mark J <[hidden email]>:

> I wanted to throw in a couple words / names to see if they "spark"
> anything.
>
>
> Arise
> Dawn
> Raise / Rise
>
> Dimension
> Facet
> Morph
> Poly
> Strand
>
> Derive
> Drive
> Quest
> Journey
>
> Fortune
> Prospect
> Trend
>
>
> -Mark K
>
>


--

<http://www.codeoscopic.com>

Carlos Rovira

Director General

M: +34 607 22 60 05

http://www.codeoscopic.com

http://www.avant2.es


Conocenos en 1 minuto! <https://youtu.be/P2IEAYDG5HU>


Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener
información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por
error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y
proceda a su destrucción.

De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le comunicamos
que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC
S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del
servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso,
rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a nuestras
oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación
necesaria.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

piotrz
Carlos,

Love your passion and share it fully. I cannot fully agree with you that
having an old application in Flex people will need to rewrite completely.
If they have separated enough good logic - they can put it without to much
effort in our framework. - That is huge advantage in my opinion.

Voting is going well on renaming. We have enough voices. Even if I change
my vote it is still pass with renaming.

The question is - what's with code rename? Can we stay as is? -

I think someone should start vote with all name proposition. I don't have
capacity within next 24 hours.

Piotr

On Fri, Sep 15, 2017, 16:21 Carlos Rovira <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm with Om and others that one of the results we pursue with this renaming
> is to avoid the "Flex" name. We talked about the problems we have today
> with clients when "Flex" is put in a discussion. You pay in terms of
> credibility to your client.
>
> For migration : As a customer, I don't think migration is a real option.
> FlexJS impose a very different code so almost all must be rewritten. You
> only can think in maintain your languages (AS3/MXML) and environments (FB,
> IDEA,...), so for me there's no much room there to discuss. I must say that
> nowadays people like us considering to migrate would consider other actual
> techs like Angular or React since the cost is similar and they get the
> popular framework in 2017.
>
> I see this renaming as a way to rebrand all our project and present it to
> the world with new visuals and marketing. And try to compete in the same
> terms they do. Same kind of name, same kind of website, and so on...
>
> About Alex proposal to make different packages I think it could work, but
> for me that would be a plan after rename, rebranding and website creation.
> We can have it in mind for next steps after that. For me we need the same
> top name for product and project, and then we can release a package for
> people wanting to migrate called "apache XXX FlexJS" or something. But
> consider that to make that real we will need people interested in make such
> package and work for it. And consider how many people will be planing to
> migrate from Flex and will find that FlexJS is completely different and
> they can do it easily.
>
> @Piotr, my plans will be to work (if people wants me on that) on: website,
> logo design.... for me the motivation to work in that things is to get a
> name that will make me think we can reach our goals, since if I don't
> believe in a name will be complicated to give us a good work.
> Far beyond that I always want to put work on the visuals of a component
> design, I think we need that as we need the website and new name.
>
>
>
>
>
> 2017-09-15 13:17 GMT+02:00 Kessler CTR Mark J <[hidden email]>:
>
> > I wanted to throw in a couple words / names to see if they "spark"
> > anything.
> >
> >
> > Arise
> > Dawn
> > Raise / Rise
> >
> > Dimension
> > Facet
> > Morph
> > Poly
> > Strand
> >
> > Derive
> > Drive
> > Quest
> > Journey
> >
> > Fortune
> > Prospect
> > Trend
> >
> >
> > -Mark K
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> <http://www.codeoscopic.com>
>
> Carlos Rovira
>
> Director General
>
> M: +34 607 22 60 05
>
> http://www.codeoscopic.com
>
> http://www.avant2.es
>
>
> Conocenos en 1 minuto! <https://youtu.be/P2IEAYDG5HU>
>
>
> Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener
> información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje por
> error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y
> proceda a su destrucción.
>
> De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le comunicamos
> que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es CODEOSCOPIC
> S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación del
> servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de acceso,
> rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a nuestr
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=rigi%C3%A9ndose+a+nuestr&entry=gmail&source=g>
> as
> oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la documentación
> necesaria.
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

Alex Harui-2
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher
It is funny, but actually, as we we've been thinking about adding suffixes
for target runtimes like Bend -> BendJS, it did occur to me that we would
have a problem if someone created a runtime we wanted to target called
"Dover".

My 2 cents,
-Alex

On 9/15/17, 2:59 AM, "Kessler CTR Mark J" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>I actually spilt some coffee on this one. Lol
>
>-Mark K
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Erik de Bruin [mailto:[hidden email]]
>Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 1:26 PM
>To: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork
>
>BendForward...
>
>(just kidding!)
>
>EdB
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork

OmPrakash Muppirala
On Sep 15, 2017 8:37 AM, "Alex Harui" <[hidden email]> wrote:

It is funny, but actually, as we we've been thinking about adding suffixes
for target runtimes like Bend -> BendJS, it did occur to me that we would
have a problem if someone created a runtime we wanted to target called
"Dover"


Hahaha.  Took me a while to get it.  I hope no one does that.



My 2 cents,
-Alex

On 9/15/17, 2:59 AM, "Kessler CTR Mark J" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>I actually spilt some coffee on this one. Lol
>
>-Mark K
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Erik de Bruin [mailto:[hidden email]]
>Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2017 1:26 PM
>To: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Name of the FlexJS Fork
>
>BendForward...
>
>(just kidding!)
>
>EdB
>
123456789