On 11/24/12 11:14 PM, "Frédéric THOMAS" <webdoubl...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I guess no company use this kind of approach we use with the mavenizer,
> instead, they build their maven project, which generate eveything directly
> mavenized.
> A company may want to put some artifacts public without sources, that's a
> common use but for what there's in Adobe SDKs, that's already public in some
> way, everyone can already download them, what would be the point to not make
> them available as well via Maven ?
Because when you go to the download page, you have to accept the licensing
terms. Maven doesn't have any support for forcing people to accept
licenses. One option available to us is to provide Adobe with a Maven
plug-in that will force a licensing dialog (once per machine, I suppose).
>
>
>> Why is this not ok for big companies?
>
> For big companies, the common rule is to accept artifacts from few quite
> known public repositories only and if the artifacts are not in snapshot
> version, so, very far from what we propose via the mavenizer where they will
> have to do things by hand.
I know it would be less desirable, but why can't we call the AIR SDK a build
tool? Don't folks have to download and install a JDK and Maven itself? Or
can Maven handle switching JDK versions?
Are this big companies really not using anything that doesn't have an open
license?
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
