incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "christofer.dutz@c-ware.de" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
Subject AW: [Discussion] Implementing a dedicated maven-flex-plugin
Date Wed, 07 Nov 2012 20:46:19 GMT
Yeah ... I'm sort of counting on that. 

Even if I know that the initial effort in creating a compiler-mojo will not be easily distributed,
but as soon as that step is taken we're good to do it "The Apache Way" (Learnt that in the
Community Track on the ApacheCon today ;-) )

Chris

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: omuppi1@gmail.com [mailto:omuppi1@gmail.com] Im Auftrag von Om
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 7. November 2012 21:41
An: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
Betreff: Re: [Discussion] Implementing a dedicated maven-flex-plugin

On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 12:35 PM, christofer.dutz@c-ware.de < christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>
wrote:

> Well this was allways my final goal. But I know that re-implemnting 
> something like Flexmojos would take quite some time. So my shedule was 
> to fix what was allready available and provide everyone with a 
> solution that they could use and after that to start working on 
> something new. I would call my work on the new FDK structure and 
> adjusting FM to is finished and now I would concentrate on the next generation maven
plugin.
>
> Chris
>
>
Chris,

I am sure that the Apache Flex community would be able to help you out with your future efforts
on this next generation maven plugin.

Thanks,
Om


>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: carlos.rovira@gmail.com [mailto:carlos.rovira@gmail.com] Im 
> Auftrag von Carlos Rovira
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 7. November 2012 21:28
> An: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: [Discussion] Implementing a dedicated maven-flex-plugin
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> I think you are choosing the right path. People using old SDKs could 
> use old flexmojos dependency...people using apache flex could use your 
> new version. So I think your plan should be ok for all users of Flex.
>
>
>
>
> 2012/11/7 christofer.dutz@c-ware.de <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > as most of you probably know, I'm currently working on a tool to 
> > generate Mavenized FDKs. In parallel I am adjusting Flexmojos to 
> > support the new Apache FDKs so people can build Flex applications 
> > using
> Maven.
> >
> > So far so good. After finishing the Generator and adjusting 
> > Flexmojos to all of my changes, the last step was to generate the 
> > 4.8 FDK using the maven group id org.apache.flex instead of com.adobe.flex.
> >
> > Now this introduced MAJOR problems. Currently you could use 
> > Flexmojos with 4.8, if you compile the entire Plugin against the 
> > group id of apache or you could use the adobe fdks after compiling 
> > it against the
> adobe group id.
> > The main reason is that otherwise Maven imports two versions of the 
> > jars (the one of the FDK you want and the one Flexmojos was compiled
> against).
> >
> > Sorting this out would be a total nightmare as there are really 
> > magical hacks working inside the build which cause any change in the 
> > scopes of dependencies to blow everything up.
> > I guess this is because Flexmojos includes insanely much code for 
> > supporting legacy FDKs (back to 2.0 FDKs) and a ton of different 
> > tools for different parts of the build lifecycle.
> >
> > My question now would be if it would not be better to officially 
> > leave Flexmojos to be compiled against com.adobe.flex and to include 
> > an option in the generator to generate the Apache FDKs to the Adobe 
> > namespace and to let users be happy with that and use it.
> >
> > In parallel I would volunteer to start work on a new plugin aimed at 
> > apache flex, but leaving away support of the Adobe FDKs. I would 
> > suggest to concentrate on the main path, supporting only apache 
> > fdks, only flexunit
> > 4.1 for unit-testing, only the newest granite code generator and so 
> > on. In this case this should be a manageable task, even if it will 
> > take
> a while.
> > As soon as the Version 1.0 is out we could start extending this to 
> > support more stuff our users would need. I think continuing to add 
> > more and more code to Flexmojos will only make it an unmaintainable 
> > monster whith all the problems comming from that.
> >
> > As I mentioned, I would volunteer to start such a thing and I think 
> > using Flexmojos as an inspiration on how to possibly implement 
> > something like that it should be manageable.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Chris
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> Director de Tecnología
> M: +34 607 22 60 05
> F:  +34 912 35 57 77
> http://www.codeoscopic.com
> http://www.directwriter.es
> http://www.avant2.es
>

Mime
View raw message