Chris, a small nitpick - please use the subject tag [FlexJS] instead of [FLEX-JS]
Thanks, Om On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de > wrote: > Yeah ... sorry for that ... I meant SWC containing the SWF, catalog and JS > resources. > This way we wouldn't have to switch any maven modules/artifacts for a JS > build, but simply select FlexJS as compilerName in Flexmojos. > > I just commented on an Issue in Youtrack that was just updated by > Jetbrains with a comment that IntelliJ doesn't support FlexJS or VF2JS ... > so I guess it doesn't support it. > > Chris > > ________________________________________ > Von: Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> > Gesendet: Montag, 10. November 2014 21:30 > An: dev@flex.apache.org > Betreff: Re: [FLEX-JS] Streamlining the packaging > > On 11/10/14, 12:23 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > wrote: > >Would it be possible to package the JS parts in the same units as SWFs? > > > >I was thinking of one of these scenarios: > > > >- For each FlexJS swc, a matching directory for JS exists > > > >- For each FlexJS swc a zip containing the JS part exists > > > >- A FlexJS module consists of a SWF which contains the JS part as static > >resources (After all a SWC is a ZIP) > > I’m not sure what you mean by “module”. Does Maven have modules? Did you > mean to write “SWF”? A “SWF” is not a zip. > > > > > > >The last option would definitely make things in Flexmojos 1000 times > >easier than the the others. My runner-up option would be the SWC + ZIP > >solution. Last would be the directory (I would simply zip that up when > >generating the Maven artifacts). It would be super-duper-awesome, if > >FalconJX would be able to work with JavaScript jars/zips directly without > >unpacking them, as this would be the cleanest solution. > > In another thread, someone liked the notion that a FlexJS SWC also > contains the JS files individually (not in a ZIP) as well as the SWF and > catalog.xml. Already we stick .css and some other files in there, and you > can also add in asdoc. We’d need to prove that it won’t mess up Flash > Builder if we do that. Is this what you meant as your “last option”? > > > > > > >I think these changes would need to be done anyway if tool vendors like > >Jetbrains would start adding support for FlexJS natively as they would > >have to deal with the same problems. > > I’ve been told Jetbrains already has implemented FlexJS support, although > nobody has a complete answer of an eco-system of SWC from Apache as well > as third-parties. > > -Alex > >
