> > I'd like to fix these since they shouldn't be hard to fix.
Fix them we will, then ;) Somehow <compc> is finding either the source code for the bundles on the > source path, or the compiled code for the bundles on the library path. This may have something to do with "addApplicationParentToSourcePath()" inside ResourceBundlePath in <compc>... I assume Falcon isn't doing this, but is it going to? It's easy to modify the compile-config files to get these, and it does show the dependencies more explicitly. What do you think? Cheers, Chema 2012/12/15 Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com> > I'm not sure what's going on with the resource bundle issue, but I don't > think it's an example of Falcon being pickier. Somehow <compc> is finding > either the source code for the bundles on the source path, or the compiled > code for the bundles on the library path. > > > I see several "duplicated variables" warnings ahead. Do we want to fix > them or ignore them? > > I'd like to fix these since they shouldn't be hard to fix. (The problem > with fixing the previous problem with Version.as is that Alex would kill us > if we removed all the includes of Version.as.) > > - Gordon > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chema Balsas [mailto:jbal...@gmail.com] > Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 5:05 PM > To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Falcon SDKSWCTests > > Also, I've already fixed some warnings, but I'd like to ask before going > and fix some more. We've already set to ignore > DuplicateQNameInSourcePathProblem. Should we stick to ignore warnings, or > try and fix them to end up with a cleaner/safer sdk code? > > For instance, I see several "duplicated variables" warnings ahead. Do we > want to fix them or ignore them? > > Cheers, > Chema > > 2012/12/15 Chema Balsas <jbal...@gmail.com> > > > That's usually a configuration problem. Does the -source-path include > >> bundles/{locale}, and is -locale set to en_US ? > > > > > > You're right, that is the case. I was setting the locale, but the > > bundles folder is not in the source-path. How's that compc doesn't > > complain? Is this another place where Falcon is pickier? > > > > Take the mx project. Other than its bundles, it uses some from > > framework, so we need to add both folders to the source-path in > > compile-config.xml where none was used before. Is this the expected > > behavior or am I missing something? > > > > Cheers, > > Chema > > > > 2012/12/14 Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com> > > > >> That's usually a configuration problem. Does the -source-path include > >> bundles/{locale}, and is -locale set to en_US ? > >> > >> - Gordon > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Chema Balsas [mailto:jbal...@gmail.com] > >> Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 1:23 PM > >> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > >> Subject: Re: Falcon SDKSWCTests > >> > >> Right now there's one recurring error when trying to compile almost > >> every missing swc. > >> > >> Error: Unable to resolve resource bundle 'core' > >> > > >> > [ResourceBundle("core")] > >> > > >> > >> This happens for several bundles. I've been trying to figure out the > >> reason, but this is still beyond my reach. It looks like Falcon never > >> does resolve these dependencies (but I'm not really sure what I'm > >> looking at here...). Gordon, do you think this is a configuration > >> problem and have any idea on how this could be addressed? Or is maybe > >> something missing in Falcon? > >> > >> Also, currently we're only checking the compile targets. Should we > >> also check the bundle ones? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Chema > >> > >> > >> 2012/12/11 Chema Balsas <jbal...@gmail.com> > >> > >> > Nice! That fixed other 5 tests for free and made other 2 easy to fix. > >> > > >> > I've committed the changes to the sdk and sdkswctests. We now have > >> > 18 out of 29 tests passing. I'll try to start looking over the hard > >> > ones over the week. > >> > > >> > Cheers, > >> > Chema > >> > > >> > > >> > 2012/12/10 Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com> > >> > > >> >> > I've just commited some changes into rpc, authoringsupport, > >> >> > framework > >> >> and mobilecomponents so that they compile properly in falcon. I've > >> >> enabled those tests and now we have 11 out of 29 working. > >> >> > >> >> Nice progress! > >> >> > >> >> > Warning: mx.core.Version is defined by multiple files: > >> >> > >> >> This is an example where Falcon is pickier but since it's just a > >> >> warning I don't think we should try to fix it. Let's change the > >> >> tests to ignore this warning. You should be able to do this by > >> >> changing the SWC tests to run with the additional command-line > >> >> argument > >> -ignore-problems=... . > >> >> > >> >> - Gordon > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: Chema Balsas [mailto:jbal...@gmail.com] > >> >> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 2:20 PM > >> >> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org > >> >> Subject: Re: Falcon SDKSWCTests > >> >> > >> >> Hi, > >> >> > >> >> I've just commited some changes into rpc, authoringsupport, > >> >> framework and mobilecomponents so that they compile properly in > >> >> falcon. I've enabled those tests and now we have 11 out of 29 > working. > >> >> > >> >> @Gordon One recurrent issue for other projects is > >> >> > >> >> Warning: mx.core.Version is defined by multiple files: > >> >> > /Users/jbalsas/Documents/dev/apache/flex/sdk/branches/develop/fr > >> >> > ame wor ks/projects/automation_agent/src/mx/core/Version.as > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Is this something Falcon will take care of, or do we need to > >> >> figure out anoter way around like in the config files for example? > >> >> > >> >> Cheers, > >> >> Chema > >> >> > >> >> 2012/12/7 Chema Balsas <jbal...@gmail.com> > >> >> > >> >> > Following with this, I've checked and in CompcTask, an > >> >> > include-config > >> >> > (ifSpec) is added with createElem instead of with > >> >> > createElemAllowAppend. Is there a reason for this? I've checked > >> >> > and changing it and adding 'append="true"' in the ant task to > >> >> > the include-file tag does fix this I don't know if there's > >> >> > something else > >> >> to take into account though. > >> >> > > >> >> > We won't be using it for now, but do you think we should try to > >> >> > fix this, or at least document it somewhere? > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > 2012/12/7 Chema Balsas <jbal...@gmail.com> > >> >> > > >> >> >> Yes, I already have it and it's working. I've accessed my > >> >> >> account through ssh to verify it and I've also checked, and I > >> >> >> have access to the apache commiters repository, but not ours. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> 2012/12/7 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com> > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> On 12/7/12 9:22 AM, "Chema Balsas" <jbal...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Oh, that explains it then... and how unfortunate > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > From Gordon's comment, I assumed we were going to stop > >> >> >>> > including the version.properties file (at least for now). > >> >> >>> > That was exactly what I was about to commit, but it seems I > >> >> >>> > still don't have access to the svn repository. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> Did you get an email asking about what you want your apache id > >> >> >>> to > >> be? > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> -- > >> >> >>> Alex Harui > >> >> >>> Flex SDK Team > >> >> >>> Adobe Systems, Inc. > >> >> >>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > >
