On 5/6/16, 2:07 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira" <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> wrote:
>2016-05-06 9:41 GMT+02:00 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>: > >> which is why I'd rather not spend time right now trying to >> make Maven build a SWC that our end-user customers won't need. >> > >If I talk as a customer, I would say that my company could never adopt a >technology that it's not maven driven, since all our products are maven >driven and we care too much about CI and all the things surronding it. >SImply we could not use FlexJS without making some strange and manual >things that I'm sure people in the project would reject. So, my opinion >Alex, is that you're wrong at that point. > >If this technology do marvelous things but can't live in a natural way in >a >CI enviroment, then it never gets the kind of adoption it deserves and >where Apache Flex SDK is nowadays thanks to Flexmojos. The customers you >want to attract take care too much about maven as they care too much about >GIT (but at this time in their own code bases) and take care about IDEs >(if >they will need to use text editor, or a production IDE like IntelliJ >IDEA). Maybe I don't understand what you mean by "maven driven". The regular Flex SDK is not built by Maven. Like you said, a Mojo makes it work. I am totally in favor of having Maven artifacts for you to use as a customer in your CI environment, but I don't know why every step that creates that artifact must be done with Maven. -Alex
