flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Apache Flex 4.10.0 Release Candidate 2
Date Mon, 22 Jul 2013 06:57:04 GMT

On 7/21/13 3:58 PM, "Justin Mclean" <justin@classsoftware.com> wrote:

>> I think you are saying that nobody actually uses the source kits.
>If you use the source kit you still have to turn it into a SDK in order
>to use or test it, in doing that you change the config files which
>removes {airHome}.
Hmm, no that isn't correct.  I test the source kit by un-tar-ing or
unzipping it and do not mix any files into it other than what the build
scripts download.  I follow the readme which has me install AIR and Flash
and other things somewhere outside the expanded source kit folders.
Mustella is set up to test in this configuration by following the
environment variables in the -config.xml files.  I don't ever test the
source kit in FB.  If I wanted to do so, I think I would run the
makeApacheFlexForFlashBuilder script which I think copies the SWCs built
from the source folder into a new folder and mixes in the pre-requisite

>So why is "{airHome}" needed? And is it only needed for a single Mustella
I'm pretty sure the AIR and probably Mobile runs will completely fail.
IIRC, we went to great lengths to set up all pre-requisites that do not
have Apache-compatible licenses in folders external to the Apache Flex
source code because our mentors recommended (required?) doing so in order
to help the person who uses the source release determine the provenance of
all of the pieces.  That's why the README has all of those environment
variables.  It is a separate issue from how the build scripts prompt you
before we start downloading other optional third-party stuff into the
source folders.

This, of course, was too painful for most of our users, and hence we have
an Installer that I'm sure most folks are using.  But overlaying the
repo's local working copy seems too risky for me, so I continue to try to
keep Flash and AIR out of my source folders.  I have shell scripts that
build and debug test apps without FB.

>It easy enough to fix in the next RC but I'd still like to know why the
>change is needed. It takes several hours to create a release candidate so
>I like to make sure this one has all issues sorted before making another
Well, technically, I'm asking for "no change".  RC1 ran successfully.
Prior kits for 4.9.x worked as well.  What is checked in has {airhome} and
the source kit should reflect what is checked in.  I believe that a diff
of the source kit against the repo is one "test" of the correctness of the
kit.  I think sometime between that and RC2 your local working copy got
>Anyone run into any other issues?
I ran rat, it looks good.  A quick scan of README and RELEASE_NOTES didn't
trigger anything for me.

Sorry that this stuff is so painful, but I think we have to get it right.


View raw message