flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Om <bigosma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [jira] [Commented] (FLEX-61) AIR version of makeApacheFlexForFlashBuilder for Windows
Date Fri, 08 Jun 2012 22:10:41 GMT
Thanks Carol.  That clarifies pretty much everything.

Can we put the flashbuilder-config.xml file into the /ide/flashbuilder
directory instead of at the root?  It makes it much cleaner.  Also, this
enables us to add support to other IDEs without cluttering the root


On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Carol Frampton <cframpto@adobe.com> wrote:

> On 6/8/12 2 :05PM, "Om" <bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Carol,
> >
> >This is a bit confusing.  I have a few concerns, hope you dont mind
> >clarifying it.
> >
> >1.  Do we really need to worry about adding support for Flash Builder 4.7
> >in the parity release?  I feel it will be better if we do this in a
> >subsequent release [1]
> >2.  Does Flash Builder 4.7 have a release date yet?  If we attempt to add
> >support for FB 4.7, wont we be tying ourselves with a timeline over which
> >we have no control?
> We don't have to do anything except put flashbuilder-config.xml in the
> root directory.
> FlashBuilder 4.6 next which I think is 4.7 will look for it.  A preview
> release will go out to select
> people in the near future.
> We've told the FlashBuilder team that going forward Apache Flex could be
> fluid and if they
> want to support Apache Flex they will have to figure out how to handle the
> changes.
> However, if enough people care that FlashBuilder continues to work,
> then, depending on the change, we might want to consider what it will do
> to FlashBuilder.
> >3.  Are the changes backwards compatible?  That is, can Flash Builder 4.6
> >and other other IDEs work with these new requirements?
> Nothing in the list is new except flashbuilder-config.xml which FB 4.7
> needs because it can't expect to find expressInstall.swf in a known
> location any more.
> We just requested they write down the file checks that have been embedded
> in FlashBuilder for quite some time.
> I discovered this list by trial and error when I first started building
> the Apache Flex for Adobe FlashBuilder directory tree.
> >4.  If not, we need to have Flash Builder/other IDE specific installation
> >steps in the Flex SDK packager.  I thought we were not allowed to use the
> >name "Flash Builder" in the packager we are building.  How will be let the
> >user make such a choice then?
> >5.  Will Apache Flex get early builds of Flash Builder 4.7 so that we can
> >test that our packager works?  Or do we rely on Adobe/Flash Builder team
> >to
> >monitor this list and pick up builds and test it internally?
> the later
> >6.  The wording in the README_integration_with_Adobe_FlashBuilder.txt is
> >misleading:
> >
> >In the section: *Verifying the validity of the Apache Flex SDK*
> >The first paragraph says:
> >
> >--This section applies to the Adobe FlashBuilder v4.6 which has been
> >> released as well as to Adobe FlashBuilder v4.7 which is currently in
> >> development at Adobe as of June 2012.--
> >>
> >
> >Further down, one of the criteria is:
> >
> >* The Apache Flex SDK version must be specified in the
> >> flex-sdk-description.xml file.  The specified version must be 4.8.0 or
> >> higher.
> >>
> My fault.  I will re-edit the file.
> I was trying to make it clear that flashbuilder-config.xml applied only to
> FB4.7+.  I missed the new version check as well.
> None of the other file checks are new.  They are already there for FB4.6.
> >Carol

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message