On 12/17/13 4:36 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi, > >> but there is no steps for working from the source kit per-se as you >>pointed out. >Which is required for a valid release. Although in this case it's a >little unusual as it not aimed at users, there not much you can do with a >pixel bender release on it own. The steps to build is in there already (build-pixelbender target). I'm not sure any further instructions are required. > >> I think we can. The main SDK release is a subset of flex-sdk already >> (doesn't have all of mustella). >A user of the SDK doesn't require mustella. It's more have 2 different >releases from the same tree I was unsure about. I guess we can ask again, but I recall Bertrand saying it was ok. Flex-utilities may have more than one thing coming out of it someday. > >> No, the SDK uses the latest package as an upstream dependency. We'd >>only >> need to vote on the pixel bender package if its contents were to change. >Which is unlikely, over time the build file etc will get out of sync with >the release. You would then have to check out the SDK from a point in >time (hopefully tagged) to get the pixel bender release code right? That's the point of tags, no? But maybe I'll pull the PB targets into their own pixel bender.xml file.
