On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:35 PM, christofer.d...@c-ware.de < christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote:
> Well this was allways my final goal. But I know that re-implemnting > something like Flexmojos would take quite some time. So my shedule was to > fix what was allready available and provide everyone with a solution that > they could use and after that to start working on something new. I would > call my work on the new FDK structure and adjusting FM to is finished and > now I would concentrate on the next generation maven plugin. > > Chris > > Chris, I am sure that the Apache Flex community would be able to help you out with your future efforts on this next generation maven plugin. Thanks, Om > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: carlos.rov...@gmail.com [mailto:carlos.rov...@gmail.com] Im Auftrag > von Carlos Rovira > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 7. November 2012 21:28 > An: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > Betreff: Re: [Discussion] Implementing a dedicated maven-flex-plugin > > Hi Chris, > > I think you are choosing the right path. People using old SDKs could use > old flexmojos dependency...people using apache flex could use your new > version. So I think your plan should be ok for all users of Flex. > > > > > 2012/11/7 christofer.d...@c-ware.de <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > > Hi, > > > > as most of you probably know, I'm currently working on a tool to > > generate Mavenized FDKs. In parallel I am adjusting Flexmojos to > > support the new Apache FDKs so people can build Flex applications using > Maven. > > > > So far so good. After finishing the Generator and adjusting Flexmojos > > to all of my changes, the last step was to generate the 4.8 FDK using > > the maven group id org.apache.flex instead of com.adobe.flex. > > > > Now this introduced MAJOR problems. Currently you could use Flexmojos > > with 4.8, if you compile the entire Plugin against the group id of > > apache or you could use the adobe fdks after compiling it against the > adobe group id. > > The main reason is that otherwise Maven imports two versions of the > > jars (the one of the FDK you want and the one Flexmojos was compiled > against). > > > > Sorting this out would be a total nightmare as there are really > > magical hacks working inside the build which cause any change in the > > scopes of dependencies to blow everything up. > > I guess this is because Flexmojos includes insanely much code for > > supporting legacy FDKs (back to 2.0 FDKs) and a ton of different tools > > for different parts of the build lifecycle. > > > > My question now would be if it would not be better to officially leave > > Flexmojos to be compiled against com.adobe.flex and to include an > > option in the generator to generate the Apache FDKs to the Adobe > > namespace and to let users be happy with that and use it. > > > > In parallel I would volunteer to start work on a new plugin aimed at > > apache flex, but leaving away support of the Adobe FDKs. I would > > suggest to concentrate on the main path, supporting only apache fdks, > > only flexunit > > 4.1 for unit-testing, only the newest granite code generator and so > > on. In this case this should be a manageable task, even if it will take > a while. > > As soon as the Version 1.0 is out we could start extending this to > > support more stuff our users would need. I think continuing to add > > more and more code to Flexmojos will only make it an unmaintainable > > monster whith all the problems comming from that. > > > > As I mentioned, I would volunteer to start such a thing and I think > > using Flexmojos as an inspiration on how to possibly implement > > something like that it should be manageable. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Chris > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > Director de Tecnología > M: +34 607 22 60 05 > F: +34 912 35 57 77 > http://www.codeoscopic.com > http://www.directwriter.es > http://www.avant2.es >
