Well I am currently experimenting with the Flexmojos Build, but it seems the compiler is producing swfs and swcs correctly even if playerglobal is called playerglobal-13.0.swc ... If there are parts in the SDK that have this hard-coded name, would it be reasonable to refactor these? I would certainly prefer to omit some maven hacks form the plugin. Especially when thinking about the plugin rewrite I have setup,
Chris ________________________________________ Von: Alexander Doroshko <alexander.doros...@jetbrains.com> Gesendet: Montag, 2. Juni 2014 10:01 An: dev@flex.apache.org Betreff: Re: AW: Is/Was there a requirement for the playerglobal.swc having to be named exactly this way? I'm afraid hardcoded "playerglobal.swc" is still not wiped out from the compiler sources. See flex2.compiler.mxml.lang.StandardDefs#SWC_PLAYERGLOBAL, its usage in flex2.compiler.CompilerSwcContext#createSource() and further usages of flex2.compiler.Source#isInternal(). With renamed playerglobal.swc compiler will just work incorrectly. On 01.06.2014 3:09, Christofer Dutz wrote: > But if I build using maven, it shouldn't matter ... so I was wandering why > Velo implemented this extremely complicated renaming ... > Seems to work nicely without :-) > > Chris > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com] > Gesendet: Samstag, 31. Mai 2014 22:15 > An: dev@flex.apache.org > Betreff: Re: Is/Was there a requirement for the playerglobal.swc having to be > named exactly this way? > > HI, > >> So is this now an obsolete requirement? > As far as I aware Flash Builder expects it to be called playerglobal.swc. > > Thanks, > Justin
