Hi, Well to the issues: I don't know all of them, I just know that Velo keept on complaining about Adobe breaking stuff. The only thing that I currently have on my radar is that the ASDoc in the latest SDK version was totally broken. Having a look at the code showed my that this module would have to be completely rewritten. I don't know if this has allready been done as I am currently still working on migrating the old stuff and sorting out major issues.
What do you mean with the "IP issues"? Chris -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Gesendet: Dienstag, 22. Mai 2012 23:50 An: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: Library Versions used in Flex SDK On 5/22/12 5:41 AM, "christofer.d...@c-ware.de" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: > I allready feared that there could be problems with legal issues in > distributing the runtimes. I guess the only solution would be do > publish the tool to enable people to generate their own SDK versions > (including the flash players and playerglobals). I'm open to trying to see if Adobe can create artifacts for the Flash and AIR SDKs. I have no idea of what it would take. > > Flexmojos is not only a link between Flex and Maven, but integrates > several other tools, that make it extremely valuable: > - Apparat Integration to optimize the SWFs and SWCs > - GraniteDS to automatically generate the ActionScript model classes > from their Java counterparts. > So simply integrating the basic compiler feature would strip a lot of > it's functionality. What percentage of users are using this functionality? Might be best to hit the sweet spot and have everything else be optional? > It would be great however if the compiler would could be called > directly instead of having to go the way of simulating the commandline call. What would that look like? > > I know that Flexmojos still has quite some issues, but most of the > Issues I had to resolve were mainly related to problems in the Flex > compiler code (Just to mention one: Try using ASDoc with code comments > containing the "@" > character ;-) ). I toally agree that the general perspective should be > to integrate the functionality of flexmojos into Flex, or at least > have them maintained by the same group, but I think the current SDK > has far too many issues that should be adressed first. The Adobe SDKs are important to folks and you are welcome to do what you can with them. This thread is about the Apache Flex SDKs and we have more flexibility. > Trying to create a new Maven integration layer would just add more to > the todo list. So for now I think it would be great to work together. > I would be glad to contribute to make Flex work better. Make sure you get the IP issues resolved and we'll be glad to have your contributions. > As soon as the main issues are resolved I would also be glad to help > you create something similar or to integrate flexmojos to flex. > > I'm also not requesting to change flex in any way to make mavenizing > the sdk easier. Earlier you said the current SDK has far too many issues. What are these issues and how do we address them without changing Flex? > Currently I was only suggesting to clean up the structure of the SDK > to more reflect the parts natures and to generate some helpfull other > stuff that makes life of people using it a lot easier: > - Generate a special pom containing only dependencyManagement section. > This can be imported into other maven projects to automatically set > the versions of the sdk artifacts. No idea what that means, but by all means, show us what needs to be done. > - Generate a special jar containing metadata that can be used by > flexmojos to perform validation (minimum SFW-version, minimum playerglobal > version, etc.). > Just to name a few. If this would be useful if we Apache had its own mapping to Maven, then feel free to show us what needs to be done here as well. -- Alex Harui Flex SDK Team Adobe Systems, Inc. http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
