Ok, looks like I removed the typedefs mojo "temporarily" and never replaced it. I think it will work now.
-Alex On 3/4/17, 9:58 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: >I think I never ran maven in typedefs. But they are swc not app so use a >different mojo? > >Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> > > >________________________________ >From: Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >Sent: Saturday, March 4, 2017 9:39:26 AM >To: dev@flex.apache.org >Subject: Re: [FlexJS][Maven] JS-only > >Hi Alex, > >So I switched to the dual branch and built the compiler without problems. >When building the typedefs however I am getting the exact same error in >the JS module. >I guess I will have to adjust the was the typedefs are built. I can see >that the AS code is being generated correctly, but that is no longer >compiled to an SWC. > >Any ideas? I’ll have a look at the asjs module right away. > >Chris > >Am 04.03.17, 18:23 schrieb "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com>: > > > > On 3/4/17, 1:11 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> >wrote: > > >Hi Alex, > > > >If you have a flexjs module, that produces just the JavaScript, you >need > >to configure another plugin to pack that up as a war archive as maven > >doesn’t support directories as build artifacts. > >So you would need to add that (see the output of the archetype for >pure > >JS applications). In the case of the other native application that > >shouldn’t produce an SWF, just set > >“<outputJavaScript>true</outputJavaScript>” … If you like, I could >give > >you a hand on this … would I need just the dual branch of the asjs or > >from all modules? > > It would be great if you would deal with this. You will need the dual > branch from flex-falcon and flex-asjs, Flex-typedefs doesn't have a >dual > branch. > > I think the WAR package is already in the process since if you have a >SWF, > it appears some later step creates the WAR. I'm assuming that >because the > SWF artifact doesn't exist the build fails before getting to the WAR >step. > > My hope is that folks can easily switch between generating just SWF > output, just JS output, or both. There is a new compiler.targets >option > that drives that, and I've taken out the outputJavaScript option. >Maybe > that's not the Maven way, but this way folks don't have to configure a > second execution with the outputJavaScript option on. > > Thoughts? > -Alex > > >
