flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
Subject Re: AW: [FlexJS] Change flex sdk descriptor?
Date Wed, 25 Jan 2017 22:39:34 GMT
Ok … so the Maven build now produces a flexjs-sdk-description.xml

  <name>Apache Flex: FlexJS 0.8.0-SNAPSHOT FP20.0 AIR20.0 en_US</name>

And I took the opportunity to comment out a line in the team-page example as it was breaking
the build …


Am 25.01.17, 22:29 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>:

    I never said to drop support for FlashBuilder. All I wanted, is to have the default distribution
to be clean and to apply the FB hack on demand if necessary.
    But I’m ok with a flexjs specific descriptor. I hate doing things sloppily and definitely
hate hacks like the one needed to support FB.
    Am 25.01.17, 21:06 schrieb "omuppi1@gmail.com im Auftrag von OmPrakash Muppirala" <omuppi1@gmail.com
im Auftrag von bigosmallm@gmail.com>:
        On Jan 25, 2017 10:21 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>
        Hi Alex,
        But all the IDEs are alive and are being maintained. Flash Builder is the
        only one that's but been maintained.
        But I'd be ok with an additional descriptor if more people here think we
        should keep legacy stuff in a new product.
        I think we should maintain support for FB as much as possible.
        A lot of Flex developers already use it, so supporting that IDE would be a
        good idea to increase adoption of FlexJS.
        Von meinem Samsung Galaxy Smartphone gesendet.
        -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
        Von: Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com>
        Datum: 25.01.17 17:34 (GMT+01:00)
        An: dev@flex.apache.org
        Betreff: Re: [FlexJS] Change flex sdk descriptor?
        On 1/25/17, 7:51 AM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:
        >Well the thing is, that I don’t want to have to rely on a single
        >dimension of values to switch multiple dimensions of functionality. What
        >happens if people start using x > 4.8 for detecting FlexJS and assume we
        >release a regular Flex 4.8? What happens then? Things can get really ugly
        >in that case and I am sure it’s gonna happen soon ;-)
        >I guess we shouldn’t force a hack in our SDK just because a no longer
        >supported legacy IDE otherwise doesn’t know how to handle it.
        We don't have control over many other IDEs as well, so a change here
        requires every other IDE to change.  Seems like we have more control over
        What if we introduce a new file called flexjs-sdk-descriptor.xml and leave
        the old one with the hack for legacy support.  Then all IDE vendors can
        move to checking the new file when they have time?

View raw message