Swiz Licensing

[Rui D. Silva]

Hi,

Can anyone tell me if there is any licensing policy attached to Swiz.
GPL, LGPL, MIT, CC?

Thanks,
Rui

[João Fernandes]

Hi Rui, from http://code.google.com/p/swizframework/ you can see that's
Apache License 2.0

Happy to see you adopting Swiz
--

João Fernandes

Adobe Certified Expert
Adobe Community Expert
http://www.onflexwithcf.org
http://www.riapt.org
Portugal Adobe User Group (http://aug.riapt.org)

[Chris Scott]

Yep Apache 2...

2009/7/21 João Fernandes <joaopedromar...@gmail.com>

[Rui D. Silva]

Sorry for the dumb question... It was more perfectly visible from the
google code project page.

As for using swiz, we're still not 100% sure about this. We are
currently comparing the major frameworks available for Flex and,
unfortunately, Swiz still ranks somewhat low on a few key aspects like
documentation and maturity.

We'll let you guys know if we decide for Swiz.

Thanks,
Rui

On Jul 21, 6:22 pm, Chris Scott <chris.scott....@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yep Apache 2...
>

> 2009/7/21 João Fernandes <joaopedromartinsfernan...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi Rui, fromhttp://code.google.com/p/swizframework/you can see that's

[Ben Clinkinbeard]

Better docs are being created as we speak and should be ready very
soon.

As for maturity, how is that quantified?

On Jul 22, 6:34 am, "Rui D. Silva" <ruidsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry for the dumb question... It was more perfectly visible from the
> google code project page.
>
> As for using swiz, we're still not 100% sure about this. We are
> currently comparing the major frameworks available for Flex and,
> unfortunately, Swiz still ranks somewhat low on a few key aspects like
> documentation and maturity.
>
> We'll let you guys know if we decide for Swiz.
>
> Thanks,
> Rui
>
> On Jul 21, 6:22 pm, Chris Scott <chris.scott....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yep Apache 2...
>
> > 2009/7/21 João Fernandes <joaopedromartinsfernan...@gmail.com>
>

> > > Hi Rui, fromhttp://code.google.com/p/swizframework/youcan see that's

[Rui D. Silva]

Hi Ben,

First let me congratulate you on the work you guys are doing with
swiz. Even if we end up not adopting swiz enterprise wide, I'll
definitely use it in personal projects.

As for maturity we are mainly evaluating the frameworks' closeness to
a 1.0 release, its documentation (number, quality and "uptodateness"),
number and size of implementations using the framework, number of
backward incompatible commits to the source base, etc.

If Swiz is going to have better documentation soon that could
seriously influence our evaluation. Do you have any expected target
date you could give us to see if we could postpone final decisions?

Thanks,

Rui

On Jul 22, 1:37 pm, Ben Clinkinbeard <ben.clinkinbe...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Better docs are being created as we speak and should be ready very
> soon.
>
> As for maturity, how is that quantified?
>
> On Jul 22, 6:34 am, "Rui D. Silva" <ruidsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Sorry for the dumb question... It was more perfectly visible from the
> > google code project page.
>
> > As for using swiz, we're still not 100% sure about this. We are
> > currently comparing the major frameworks available for Flex and,
> > unfortunately, Swiz still ranks somewhat low on a few key aspects like
> > documentation and maturity.
>
> > We'll let you guys know if we decide for Swiz.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Rui
>
> > On Jul 21, 6:22 pm, Chris Scott <chris.scott....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yep Apache 2...
>
> > > 2009/7/21 João Fernandes <joaopedromartinsfernan...@gmail.com>
>

> > > > Hi Rui, fromhttp://code.google.com/p/swizframework/youcansee that's

[Russell Brown]

Release numbers rarely mean a whole lot and can be fairly arbitrary. Some developers don't ever like to even break 1.0 status :) . I've also used some pretty crappy v4 apps and code. Don't forget to factor in WHO is working on the framework and the community either. I think it matters and is a nice check box for Swiz.

-Russ

--
Thanks
Russ

[Ben Clinkinbeard]

Hi Rui,

As others have pointed out, version numbers really mean nothing. There
was a whole thread on this a few weeks ago. What might be a better
metric is the number of releases, of which I think Swiz has had about
10 (counting major and minor point releases). You could easily hack
something together and call it 1.0, make a couple improvements and
call it 2.0, etc. That doesn't mean its more mature than anything
else.

As for docs, you can get an idea of what will be provided by checking
out http://swizframework.org/ I have to stress that what is there is
just a first pass and will be significantly improved. I think we are
hoping to have the documentation more or less complete in the next
month or so, and the general format will be heavy on examples.

As for backward incompatible commits, I can virtually guarantee that
will never happen. We would obviously love for Swiz to become your
enterprise's framework of choice, and can assure you it has been used
on plenty of large projects. Let us know if you need any more specific
info, and we'll certainly be making announcements when the docs are
finished.

Thanks,
Ben

> > > > > Hi Rui, fromhttp://code.google.com/p/swizframework/youcanseethat's

[Rui D. Silva]

Hi,

When I said a 1.0 release I meant a stable and complete enough release
that its creators feel comfortable enough to give it "that" stamp. The
number itself is obviously just a mere indicator and by itself means
nothing.
I totally agree that there are products out there with greater than
one release number that are total crap.

The fact that Swiz has just a 0.6.2 only means its authors are honest
enough to resist the temptation to give it a bigger release number
when they feel its still not ready for it. On the other hand if you
guys feel that it already deserves a 1.0 release number, please don't
postpone it a lot longer because it has some weight on people's
evaluation, specially in a big corporate environments.

What I felt was missing from Swiz was a good reference site and a well
established documentation base. I'll go to swizframework.org and check
it out. The fact that it's there will undoubtedly shift my initial
judgement a lot.

Thanks for all your inputs,

Rui

On Jul 24, 4:05 pm, Ben Clinkinbeard <ben.clinkinbe...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Rui,
>
> As others have pointed out, version numbers really mean nothing. There
> was a whole thread on this a few weeks ago. What might be a better
> metric is the number of releases, of which I think Swiz has had about
> 10 (counting major and minor point releases). You could easily hack
> something together and call it 1.0, make a couple improvements and
> call it 2.0, etc. That doesn't mean its more mature than anything
> else.
>
> As for docs, you can get an idea of what will be provided by checking

> outhttp://swizframework.org/I have to stress that what is there is