flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [FlexJS] FlexJS installation - bundle Google Closure Library?
Date Fri, 31 Jul 2015 20:59:09 GMT
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

> On 7/31/15, 12:03 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
> <omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 6:09 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> >> If someone wants to make these changes, I won’t object, but IMO, Google
> >> Closure Library changes often, usually for the better.  Bundling will
> >>tie
> >> a FlexJS release to a particular version of GCL and that may not always
> >>be
> >> desirable at this point.
> >
> >
> >From what I have seen, GCL is used behind the scenes by the FlexJS
> >compiler, i.e. there is no way for the user to do anything directly with
> >GCL.  I am not sure what advantage we get by getting the latest GCL
> >library
> >all the time.
> I don’t think we are using a lot of GCL code, but it appears that when we
> upgrade GCC versions we often need a newer GCL and vice-versa otherwise we
> get warnings and stuff.  And with the JS.swc, I think folks will be able
> to write directly against GCL if they want to.
> >
> >I believe tying a FlexJS release to a particular version of GCL is a good
> >thing.
> It will be.  Not so sure right now.  Or we want to do it in a way that
> makes it possible for folks to upgrade/downgrade their version of GCL.
> And even better, have the devs always get the latest, but bundle one or
> point to one in the installer scripts.

If we bundle the GCL files in a separate folder, folks could always copy
over that folder if they want a different version of GCL.

> >
> >
> >> I believe we have the option of changing the
> >> installer so it downloads GCL without asking for license approval as
> >>well.
> >>
> >>
> >That does not solve the problem of the FlexJS installation failing.  The
> >GCL download step can still fail, which seems to be happening a lot.
> Yeah, I’m tempted to file a GitHub issue in that project asking for
> releases so we can offer more stability.

I was thinking the same too.

> If they keep up changing the
> head every few days like they have been it will become a time-saver to
> bundle or point to a stable version.  If you want to do the work, I

certainly won’t stand in the way.

Yes, I want to do it.  I have some time to spend on FlexJS and I believe
this would be as good a sub-task as any other.
Any pointers on where I should start?  I am assuming the release build task
in the ant file needs to updated to first download the GCL, check the MD5,
dump it into a third-party (or something) folder before zipping up the
binary.  After, we need to update installer.xml to get rid of the GCL
step.  Is that correct?  Anything I am missing?


> -Alex

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