@Enric I understand that a new version could generate warnings/obsolete and suggest changes but, introducing errors on code that worked, and do not given a solution....
Yes. Yes. A flaw more and more common among API’s. Too sure of themselves they are. Even the older, more experienced ones - XODA
@Enric If we adapted to 2.1 what will happen in 2.2?
Difficult to see. Always in motion the future is. - XODA
@Enric Oh yes, but I'm just complaining about it, a new version suggested to change the event names, then you do to be up to date even if it was a lot of work, later, a new version go back with names, and it is not a suggestion now, you must go and change everywhere or it will not compile.
I find your lack of faith disturbing…
@Enric Good job.
Don’t be too proud of this technological error we’ve constructed. The inability to compile an app is insignificant next to the power of this Farce… I am altering the deal, pray I do not alter it any further. -XODA
@Alberto Now that the changes are settled, you can change your code to 2.1 and that will work with 3.0 and later.
Or, in other words, forget the “R2 detour”, “see 3.0”
@Greg Unfortunately it’s also possible to get this error when the parent doesn’t expose the event at all.
Look, I have exposed that I am your father! Is that not “apparent”.
@Louis @Enric : The evolutionary process is not a straight line, either in biology or in development. Some branches die quickly... There are going to be more changes in the future. And some failed ones in the lot...
Already know you that which you need. Always two APIs there are, no more, no less. Do. Or do not. There is no why. Impossible to see the future is" -XODA