flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [FlexJS][Installer] Future packaging of FlexJS releases
Date Thu, 07 Sep 2017 16:48:55 GMT
Hi Alex,

Since you fake airglobal.swc and playerglobal.swc maybe it will also work
with Moonshine. I will try to do same operation as you did and see whether
I will not have previous errors.


2017-09-07 18:43 GMT+02:00 OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosmallm@gmail.com>:

> This is a big big deal.  Thanks for getting this done.
> I would be very interested in the non-installer, simple zip file download.
> I dont care much for Ant as a requirement, I would rather continue
> maintaining the npm FlexJS package for AIR download + setup.
> Thoughts?
> Thanks,
> Om
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.invalid>
> wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Yesterday, I was able to manually create a folder of files that contained
> > no Adobe AIR or Adobe Flash files and still was an acceptable Flex/FlexJS
> > SDK for Adobe Flash Builder and allowed me to compile DataBindingExample
> > for JSFlex output only (it did not build a SWF).
> >
> > This is interesting because it could significantly change the way we
> > package FlexJS releases.  We could have a default package that is a
> > ready-to-use zip of this folder of files.  Then the Installer is no
> longer
> > needed if your goal is just to install FlexJS, fire up an IDE, and see
> how
> > it works in the browser without Flash and you don't need to see how it
> > looks in Flash.
> >
> > If this sound good to folks, I will try to alter the Ant build scripts to
> > produce such a package (maybe some other volunteer can take on doing this
> > in Maven).  In case you are wondering, what I did was fake some of the
> > Adobe files that Flash Builder looks for by making copies of some Apache
> > files.  For example, I copied the js.swc that contains the Object
> > definition for the browser to be airglobal.swc and playerglobal.swc.  So
> > far, it appears that Flash Builder is only checking for existence of
> > files, not actual classes in these files.  But we might hit some bug
> later
> > as we test this further.
> >
> > Then the next question is, what do folks do who want to get SWF output?
> > We could try to write a script for the Installer that downloads the AIR
> > and Flash SDK and puts them in the right places in the SDK folder but it
> > will run into the same memory limits that is currently a problem for the
> > Installer.  We could write a new AIR app that brings down the AIR and
> > Flash SDKs.  We could provide Ant scripts that download and deploy the
> > Adobe bits.  I think we already have bash scripts that do this.  Not sure
> > if folks on Windows will be happy with that or not.
> >
> > Using Ant has the advantage that it works on Windows, Mac and Linux.
> Bash
> > scripts require a shell on Windows.  I believe AIR apps have issues on
> > Linux.
> >
> > We could try to teach the compiler to look for and expand the AIR SDK if
> > it finds that someone specified SWF output but the AIR SDK is not found.
> > It would look in Downloads folders for the most recent AIR SDK package
> > name.  So folks who want SWF output go to the Adobe site, download an AIR
> > SDK and then run the compiler.
> >
> > This does make SWF output somewhat "second class" and I still believe
> that
> > folks who want strong-typing and will be using modules will benefit from
> > at least testing in a Flash/AIR runtime, but I think it makes the
> releases
> > truly appear independent from Adobe.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > -Alex
> >
> >
> >


Piotr Zarzycki

mobile: +48 880 859 557
skype: zarzycki10

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki

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