I don't think there should be a problem with this. Unless there are some technical issues with your restructuring proposal, we all should be able to come to a consensus and move ahead.
I believe the best time to do this would be - right after the FlexJS 0.5 release. Thanks, Om On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 2:02 AM, Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: > Well in order to seriously do this refactoring, you would also have to do > the refactoring of the directory structure. This was ne main reason for me > never having continued down that path as I knew I would have to hand-merge > stuff for quite some time. So in order to do something like this, we would > actually have to stop working on FlexJS, rearrange the directory structure > and continue from there (Eventually only a few Ant scripts would need > adjusting for the time of the transition) ... > > Don't know if there is the will do to something like this ... at least it > was my impression that it's not. > > Chris > > ________________________________________ > Von: omup...@gmail.com <omup...@gmail.com> im Auftrag von OmPrakash > Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com> > Gesendet: Freitag, 6. November 2015 10:50 > An: dev@flex.apache.org > Betreff: Re: WG: Loosing my drive ... > > Yes, the AntRun Maven plugin is a good stop gap measure. Is this an option > for FlexJS? As I understand the way FlexJS is built right now, there are > several dependencies to download and build before compiling the FlexJS > SDK. Can we mavenize the rest and use AntRun for the build FlexJS part? > > If you can do the rest, I can help out with plugging in the Antrun plugin > into the pom.xml. What do you think? > > Anyone has a better suggestion for a path forward? > > Thanks, > Om > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:40 AM, Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de > > > wrote: > > > Well here goes: > > > > Initially we have to separate between the compiler and the framework. > > Converting the compiler to maven is easier as it's simply a Java program. > > Converting the framework build to maven is eventually a little > problematic. > > Currently there is only one maven plugin for building flex applications > > with maven (Flexmojos and unfortunately it is impossible for me to donate > > this as I would have to contact anyone who contributed and have them sign > > an ICLA). > > > > In order to dress this problem I had started a new maven plugin as part > of > > the flex-utils project. Here I have started setting up the structure of a > > brand-new plugin that's pure ASF. The cool thing with this is that I > could > > drop a lot of stuff needed for supporting legacy Adobe and Apache Flex > > versions. I didn't continue down that path as I wanted to make Flexmojos > > feature complete prior to starting from scratch as I know this will take > > quite a while. Still I am missing Mobile Packaging for iOS and auto > > downloading of Flashplayer and Air runtime, but I am hoping on finishing > > this soon. As soon as Flexmojos 7.1.0 is released, I want to work on the > > Apache Flex Maven plugin ... If I don't loose interest in the project > till > > then. > > > > A "solution" would be to use the Maven-Antrun-Plugin to use the Flex Ant > > Target inside a Maven build till the maven plugin is useable. The good > > thing would be that we could concentrate on the features needed for the > > build of Flex itself and hopefully transition quite fast. But we wouldn't > > have to wait for that to happen as the Antrun option should work fine. > > > > But coming back to your questions: > > > > Yes in both cases ... run "mvn install" in the root the SDK would be > built > > and unit-tested. If you run "mvn install" in the examples, the examples > > would be built, but the output directory wouldn't be "bin" but "target" > ;-) > > > > Chris > > > > ________________________________________ > > Von: omup...@gmail.com <omup...@gmail.com> im Auftrag von OmPrakash > > Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com> > > Gesendet: Freitag, 6. November 2015 10:26 > > An: dev@flex.apache.org > > Betreff: Re: WG: Loosing my drive ... > > > > Chris, > > > > I read your email twice. I don't see what I was expecting. Here are a > > couple of simple questions: > > > > 1. As a FlexJS SDK Developer, I want to build the FlexJS SDK. I want to > > go to the flex-asjs folder and run mvn install. I want the entire SDK > > built and ready to release. > > > > 2. As a FlexJS SDK User, I want to go inside the > > flex-asjs/examples/flexjs/ChartExample folder and run mvn install. I > > expect to see the built artifacts in the bin/js-debug, bin/js-release and > > bin-debug folders > > > > What is missing for these two (seemingly related, but different) build > > processes to work correctly. I think we should must concentrate on these > > two goals. > > > > Thanks, > > Om > > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:07 AM, Christofer Dutz < > christofer.d...@c-ware.de > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Ok ... let me respond to some of this: > > > > > > Alex wrote: > > > > IMO, the good and bad of Apache being a “do-ocracy” is that, while > you > > > can > > > > work on pretty much whatever interests you, at least in this project, > > > > > > I definitely don't agree ... it's far from a "do-oracy" it's a > > > "discuss-oracy" ... I bet the amount of bytes in the mailinglist > > outweighs > > > the bytes going to the repo ;-) > > > > > > Alex wrote: > > > > >Adding my statement from the initial thread, that from now on I will > > > stop > > > > >contributing to things not built by a sensible build (doesn't have > to > > be > > > > >Maven even if I strongly suggest it). > > > > > > > > I’m going to take that as a softening of your position. I don’t > think > > > > anybody would argue that builds should not be “sensible”, but what > does > > > > that really mean? And what practical steps can we do that doesn’t > > grind > > > > feature development and bug fixing to a halt? > > > > > > Well ANT tends to become a monster as you can do anything with it ... > > > therfore everyone does everything with it, but each one differently. > > Gradle > > > goes down the same path ... even if it automates a lot of stuff that > has > > > been identified as "have to do that over and over again". Maven on the > > > contrast has the beauty of not only having a pre-defined build process, > > but > > > also a pre-defined project structure. The first newbe here being able > to > > > checkout the Flex SDK and immediately explain to me the internal > > structure > > > of the project will get a free Beer next time we meet. With maven it > > > doesn't matter what project you get, you sort of immediately grasp the > > > structure as it's a standard. > > > > > > What are the problems I see? > > > - The structure of the project istself (I still don't know exactly what > > > parts of the SDK do what and I do admit that I have dug in that code > much > > > more than most people here) > > > - The structure of the build itself (There are uncountable targets, > > > sometimes with identical names in multiple build scripts ... the only > way > > > to understand the order in which they are called is to build and look > at > > > the log and hope you get it right. I wanted to add some things multiple > > > times and was simply stuck with finding out how things are done and > how I > > > have to get my stuff in there without breaking anything else) > > > - The requirements (The build doesn't tell you what it requires, what > > it's > > > missing and what is expected to be there. If something blows up, you > have > > > to get your hands dirty and investigate in Ant what's going wrong) > > > - Depending on 100 different download sources (Currently it feels as if > > > you start from scratch in more than 50% of the times the build doesn't > > work > > > as one of the sites stuff is downloaded from are unavailable. I have > > never > > > seen Maven-Central be offline and if this should ever happen Google > > keeps a > > > complete mirror online, so in the worst case all we would have to do is > > > switch the root repo to the Google one) > > > - Finding out thy things don't work (We check the checksums of jars > when > > > we download them ... but as soon as they are there, we never bother. > > > Several times I haven't been working on a part of Flex for some time, > > > coming back later and having problems ... after quite some time of > > > investigation I found out that the version of a jar had changed, but as > > we > > > simply store it as "mylib.jar" the build didn't detect this and assumed > > all > > > was good) > > > - Simply to build all of our parts you have to keep a different set of > > > targets in mind to clean, clean-all, compile, test, whatsoever ... > > > sometimes a target is available in multiple parts, but do different > > things > > > ... think about the clean goals ... clean, wipe, clean-all, > > > clean-dependencies, ... can't remember all of them. > > > - Building Flex, FlexJS and Falcon feels like shooting at a moving > target > > > ... whenever I come back I have to adjust something ... some new > > > environment variables, different libs, different targets/goals to > execute > > > in a different order) > > > - We use patched versions of ancient libs (I think using patched libs > is > > > the worst thing you can do. If you need something, contribute. I have > > > reverse engineered the xalan patch for example and newer versions of > > xalan > > > have addressed similar issues, so it could be that the latest version > > > solves the problems our patch hacked in there) > > > > > > What's missing on the maven side is a way to mavenize the FlashPlayer > and > > > the Air runtime, but I'm working on this ... as soon as one of the 3rd > > > party libs for unpacking archives is able to unpack Mac DMG archives, I > > > will be able to technically finish this. The result will be not having > a > > > single prerequisite to building flex applications with maven ... all > you > > > need is Java and Maven and off you go. And it takes care of problems > you > > > have due to building for a different Flash/Air version than you have > > linked > > > in your environment variables. BUT I am expecting to be engaged in > > another > > > major legal issue discussion with Adobe guys ... really not looking > > forward > > > to that. > > > > > > The general problem I see at the moment is that you want to push out > > stuff > > > so people start testing it and you can fix stuff. I want to make fixing > > > stuff easy so more people can actually do it. Most of us don't work on > > Flex > > > full-time. If I find a problem and I want to fix it and I have an > > afternoon > > > of time, I don't want to invest this afternoon in order to setup things > > so > > > I could start fixing things, but then have no time left to actually do > > so. > > > And as soon as I find time again, things have changed in a way that I > > need > > > to invest most of my time again to get things running. > > > > > > The was things currently are the project will divide into two > fractions: > > > a) The ones that have the luxury of having someone pay for them to work > > on > > > Flex full time > > > b) the others that simply sit there and wait for things to happen. > > > > > > That's definitely the way Adobe used to work, but it's not the way the > > ASF > > > works. "Community over Code" > > > > > > So converting Falcon to become a real Maven project as a first step > isn't > > > that hard. There were missing parts, but I contributed to those > projects > > > and the missing parts should now be available. For example JBurg is now > > in > > > Maven-Central ... I even created a Maven Plugin for using JBurg in a > > maven > > > build. Antlr and the other stuff has always been available. > > > > > > And again 10 times more text than code I have written for Flex for > quite > > > some time ... > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > Von: omup...@gmail.com <omup...@gmail.com> im Auftrag von OmPrakash > > > Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com> > > > Gesendet: Freitag, 6. November 2015 08:56 > > > An: dev@flex.apache.org > > > Betreff: Re: WG: Loosing my drive ... > > > > > > Alex, > > > > > > I believe there is a disconnect between folks who are used to maven and > > > those who are not. The beauty of maven is that the user does not need > to > > > have anything pre-installed on their computer. Write some code and > > simply > > > run "mvn install". This simple command takes care of downloading the > > SDK, > > > dependencies, compiling the code and generating the desired artifacts. > > > > > > Compare that with Ant: You download the SDK, dependencies, create > > > environment variables, build properties etc. before you can do > anything. > > > As evidenced with Flex SDK and FlexJS, setting all this up and getting > > > everything built is a big task in itself. Any contribution can be done > > > ONLY after doing all this work, which takes several tries to say the > > least. > > > > > > I think what Chris is saying is quite straightforward: lets make it > easy > > to > > > build the FlexJS SDK. Maven is one way to do it. > > > > > > Chris, from your side, I hope you can continue to lead this > 'mavenizing' > > > effort. Most of the time, I don't follow what you doing although I > > > understand that they are important steps in achieving this goal. If > you > > > can come up with a plan of action and describe what you want to do, I > am > > > sure that the community will come together to help out. > > > > > > Mavenizing does not mean we give up on Ant. Alex (and others who are > > happy > > > with Ant) can continue to build with Ant. I don't expect Alex to drop > > what > > > he is working on and help with the Mavenizing effort, although any help > > > from him would be appreciated. > > > > > > Let's start with mavenizing FlexJS. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Om > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 11/5/15, 10:35 PM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >Moving this thread to public dev list ... > > > > > > > > > >Adding my statement from the initial thread, that from now on I will > > > stop > > > > >contributing to things not built by a sensible build (doesn't have > to > > be > > > > >Maven even if I strongly suggest it). > > > > > > > > I’m going to take that as a softening of your position. I don’t > think > > > > anybody would argue that builds should not be “sensible”, but what > does > > > > that really mean? And what practical steps can we do that doesn’t > > grind > > > > feature development and bug fixing to a halt? > > > > > > > > And I’d like to hear from others: Would better build scripts cause > you > > > to > > > > contribute more? Would switching from Ant to Maven cause you to > > > > contribute more? What else could we change that would get you to > start > > > > contributing or contribute more? > > > > > > > > For sure, at the time Adobe transitioned Flex to Apache, having the > > Flex > > > > SDK work with Maven was the number one vote getter in JIRA. For > > FlexJS, > > > > I’m more worried about getting enough features and functionality to > the > > > > early adopters such that they provide us the positive testimonials we > > > need > > > > such that enterprises might start using FlexJS and then start asking > > > about > > > > Maven. IMO, if we don’t get traction, it won’t matter what our > builds > > > > look like. I keep hoping others will start contributing, and in the > > > > upcoming 0.5.0 release I invested several days in trying to make the > > > > builds more sensible because folks said that was a barrier. But what > > > else > > > > do we need to do in this area? Can others step in to help? > > > > > > > > IMO, the good and bad of Apache being a “do-ocracy” is that, while > you > > > can > > > > work on pretty much whatever interests you, at least in this project, > > > > others tend to watch you work. Maybe there’s something we can tweak > so > > > > more folks jump in. I often think folks still think that we are > still > > in > > > > the “old days” where you had very little influence on the release > that > > > > Adobe would offer up on occasion and haven’t fully understood that in > > the > > > > Apache world, things are almost the exact opposite. There is no > > > corporate > > > > entity that decides what gets done, individuals can’t just be passive > > > > customers: they need to somehow find the time to help get things > done. > > > > It could just be by using the releases, but it would be much better > if > > > > folks who know Maven could help you create a Maven builds for our > > repos, > > > > and folks who know Java could try to work on the compiler, etc. Yes, > > > > Adobe pays me to work on Flex, but Adobe is not backing Flex like it > > used > > > > to. It has turned the future of Flex over to Apache and the Apache > > Flex > > > > community. > > > > > > > > Anyway, feel free to keep venting for a bit, and even take a break if > > you > > > > need to, but I hope you will stick with us and we can open an > > discussion > > > > on more concrete things that we might be able to do to make the > builds > > > > more “sensible” and maybe even break it down into small pieces that > > > others > > > > can help with. > > > > > > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
