Well I wouldn't want to take something that "just contains one class that could fit". Especially Including a plugin system or maven runtime code just to eventually get an interface ... one that could change without notice. I think we're better off with our own.
I have it in flex-utilities and called it flex-tool-api ... I think this is where we could put similar stuff, if the need comes up. Just give it a short look if we should call things differently, but I currently think it's good that way. If you are all ok with it I would stage a release candidate of the 1.0.0 in the Apache Release Staging Repository and cast a vote on this (If this is needed). @Justin ... I don't know if the "project" needs any legal documents, Readmes etc. It should contain the headers and suit the needs of an Apache Maven release. Would be cool if you could check this for me. Chris ________________________________________ Von: Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 30. Oktober 2014 18:18 An: dev@flex.apache.org Betreff: Re: AW: AW: Generic FlexTool interface On 10/30/14, 7:16 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: >I wanted to avoid a cyclic dependency on a library hosted at Sonatype. In >the end I want all to be at Apache so I thought it would be best to add >to Apache Flex. Yes, I definitely don’t want a dependency on Sonatype stuff. I thought there was some release of a Maven mojo that was going to be all-Apache. > >I couldn't find any ... but if you try bugging Google with searches >regarding "generic tool interface", "main interface", ... you can guess >that you are completely swamped with results that are no use. I tried >this approach first but gave up after becomming more and more aware that >I will not find what I'm looking for. I didn’t read these articles, but a quick search found: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-compiler-plugin/non-javac-compilers.h tml http://www.vogella.com/tutorials/EclipsePlugIn/article.html I would think Eclipse must have an interface for plugging in compilers, but it could be very heavy. > >But even if I have to stage a snapshot, stage a release candidate, have >votes on this and finally release it ... I guess it shouldn't take too >long. And it would be a good test for a first release of a maven artifact >;-) We did a small release for PixelBender so there is precedence. -Alex
