incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: AW: AW: Library Versions used in Flex SDK
Date Sat, 19 May 2012 16:44:53 GMT



On 5/19/12 6:39 AM, "christofer.dutz@c-ware.de" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>
wrote:

> Currently Flex doesn't work at all with Maven. Even if you distribute the SDKs
> content as Maven artifacts, this is by far not enough as Maven simply doesn't
> know what to do with a Flex/Air project.
> 
> Flexmojos is a set of maven plugins that actually tells Maven what to do with
> a Maven project of packaging "swf" or "swc" and how a "war" has to be built to
> contain a Flex application.
> 
> Currently those plugins act as a wrapper to the Flex compilers, optimizers and
> runntimes so you don't have to wory about how your Maven dependencies get
> passed to the Flex compiler.
> So I don't think that Flexmojos is a dead End, it's more the missing link to
> bringing Maven and Flex together.
I understand (I think).  This list is about Apache Flex and to me, lots of
packaging changes are now possible, if not required.  For example, Apache
Flex cannot ship the same folder structure as Adobe does because it doesn't
have the right to distribute the Flash/AIR pieces.  Apache Flex also now has
control over the compiler.  In my mind, FlexMojos is a mapping between Maven
and the Adobe Flex SDKs and I've heard it has some issues.  Given all that,
I am just raising the question of whether it is better to continue on with
FlexMojos which is currently an external dependency, or whether it is better
to adjust packaging and compilers and whatever to make a simpler mapping
possible and just start over.  And then all the pieces are within Apache.
> 
> Up till now Velo (The creator of Flexmojos) had to vonvert every Flex SDK in a
> mavenized form, and deployed that on the Sonatype Maven repo. Now I have taken
> over to continue flexmojos development and as one of my first tasks I wanted
> to publish all of those patched SDKs Adobe released a few months ago. While I
> am at it, I'm refactoring the structure of the SDKs to a structure that
> relates better to the structure oft he Products (Flashplayer and Air runtime
> (together with playerglobal and airglobel) are not part of the SDK.
I think that's great that you are doing that.  At least in February, a
couple of large companies were in dire need of getting those patch SDKs
deployed and needed Maven artifacts.  That effort is outside of the Apache
Flex scope so you can do whatever you want there (assuming you have legal
rights to redistribute the Adobe pieces).  I'm just looking for your input
on how things could be better in Apache Flex as now is an important time as
we are deciding on our release packaging.
> 
> I guess as Maven is an Apache project and now Flex is an Apache project, it
> would make sense if Apache provided the SDKs as a donwloadable sdk the same
> way Adobe did, but would also provide the official releases in the Maven
> Central repository.
> The structure of these SDKs however would be the "API" Flexmojos would have to
> rely on. That's why I'm asking you guys here about your Mavenizing plans so I
> don't have to generate the SDKs and adjust Flexmojos to that new structure and
> then do all of that again as soon as the Flex project starts distributing your
> SDKs. This would result in 3 structural different sets of Flex SDKs deployed
> in Nexuses/Artifactories/etc. all over the planet. I would like to avoid this.
> 
> As a suggestion, I could provide you with the SDKs I generated and we could
> optimize them together. Then you could simply use the tool I created to
> officially distribute the new SDKs from then on.
That would be a useful data point, but I really want to make sure some
aspect of Apache Flex shouldn't be changing to make Maven-izing easier to do
and maintain.
> 


-- 
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui


Mime
View raw message