Well, it seems the in last 2 answers (Mike and myself), there is a contradiction, actually there is not, there are only few scenarios for IntelliJ IMO
- We don't do anything particular and we use FlexJS as a lib on top of the Flex SDK an we have a not user friendly setup as we've seen recently. - We overlay ourself the FlexJS SDK on top of the FlexSDK, we deliver it like that and make think IJ that's a flex SDK (that was a bit my previous answer), in this case, we could have I guess most of the IDE goodies working, not ideal at all but better. - We create a Facet for the Flex SDK and this facet does the job of overlaying the FlexSDK with FlexJS an plug the FlexJS compilation workfow, etc.. into the IDE, create some wizards, etc..., that still means the user will create a Flex Project before applying the facet though - We create a Facet for the FlexMojo in the same way Jangaroo does for its maven plugin and this facet take care of the FlexJS compilation workfow into the IDE, create some wizards, etc..., that still means the user will create a Maven Project before applying the facet though - We don't base anything on the FlexSDK, we need a plugin like Randori. Frédéric THOMAS > Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 12:53:46 -0400 > Subject: Re: [FlexJS] IntelliJ Integration > From: teotigraphix...@gmail.com > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > @Alex > > https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-116986 > > Been there, done that. > > > BTW, I would hope that better integration with IntelliJ doesn’t require a > whole Randori-like plug in. > > Considering how much time Fred etal put into that "project", I doubt there > is enough time to get even close to what we had. > > It's not a question of if you should, it's something that speeds up > development. I agree in one respect that before I spent any time on an > extras for workflow enhancement, the framework needs to be used by more > than the developers, my total mistake with the whole Randori project. > > I'm not making any mistakes this time because I am using my hobby time, > psychologically it's different for me that it's just a fun thing to do > right now. I needed a little project that would challenge my mind and > programming skills compared to what I do on mobile right now, it's just > plain work. > > Mike > > On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On 5/15/15, 9:03 AM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > >It was a revert of the previous commit because I used IntelliJ the code > > >cleanup function which touched all the files, the following commit > > >59659f7cc66a20a9450d4a3117a5f999f1fa41c7 shows that only DebugCLI and > > >Extensions was touched. > > > > > >In this case, it could be that because the IJ Flex Plugin reconized the > > >FlexJS SDK as a Flex SDK, it applied a fix it had for FDB that wasn't in > > >correlation with the last version because it couldn't determinate it. > > > > Ah yes, I see that now. I wonder if there is some other explanation for > > the FaultActions exception? The window where FaultActions was changed was > > small. Anyway if folks have it working then it doesn’t matter. > > > > BTW, I would hope that better integration with IntelliJ doesn’t require a > > whole Randori-like plug in. Falcon should be able to swap in for MXMLC > > with fewer changes. > > > > I did notice that Alexander Doroshko is watching the FDB bug. I was going > > to suggest to you that you put in a comment on that bug asking him to > > participate on this thread. Or didn’t somebody file a feature request in > > IntelliJ’s bug base asking for FlexJS support? Maybe we should put in a > > comment on there. > > > > -Alex > > > > > >
