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: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: [POLL] Maven and Apache Flex
Date Thu, 29 Nov 2012 22:51:41 GMT



On 11/29/12 2:43 PM, "christofer.dutz@c-ware.de" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>
wrote:

> Well this part should actually be a "mojo" ... that's sort of part of a
> complete plugin. What I could do, would be to sort of start off with creating
> this mojo (Without placing the code in the public Apache SVN). As soon as
> Adobe gives the ok, we would add it there.
> 
> As it is possible to fragment a plugin into multiple jars, even if Adobe
> requested the mojo to remain closed source, we could deploy the mojos jar in a
> public repo and the user wouldn't see a difference.
Legal seemed ok with having the source being open once they are convinced it
gives them sufficient legal protection, so wouldn't worry about it never
being opened if we end up using it.
> 
> What do the others here in the list think about this? Would this be a solution
> that you and Apache could live with? (Hopefully people are still reading this
> thread even if there are quite a lot of "AW's" in the title ;-) )
> 
> Chris
> 
> 
> -----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. November 2012 23:28
> An: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: [POLL] Maven and Apache Flex
> 
> Yes, if we don't have to touch the Adobe packages we will be much better off.
> 
> I just got tentative approval from legal, but still need approval from runtime
> product management.
> 
> One important thing, legal may want you to develop this plug-in without
> checking it into any public source code repository until they have a chance to
> see it work.  They may change their minds later and let us develop the plug-in
> in the open, but that's their position for now.  I guess you'd give me the
> plug-in and I would get Maven working on my computer and screen-share with
> them.
> 
> So, I think you can get started on this, but don't check in into Apache SVN or
> GitHub just yet.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Alex
> 
> On 11/29/12 1:59 PM, "christofer.dutz@c-ware.de" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>
> wrote:
> 
>> In maven if you want to use a library or a ressource, you define a
>> dependency to a groupId, artifactId and version (Optionally even a
>> classifier). These 4 attributes define the identity of the ressource.
>> Think of the pom.xml as being something similar to the tags soldiers
>> wear around their necks. They identify the person whos waering the
>> tag. Just in case of maven there is no chain around the neck of the
>> ressource, but the link is the naming convention. I guess you will not
>> have to do anything to mavenize the Air SDKs, I allrady did most of
>> the coding needed to mavenize the content, so I would simply re-use
>> that code and do the mavenizing on the client side (I got the
>> impression that Adobe wouldn't like me providing you with a mavenized
>> zip ... even if it were nothing else than a zip containing the
>> original ,but renamed, libs just accompanied by a set of pom.xml
>> files)
>> 
>> Chris
>> 
>> -----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com]
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 29. November 2012 22:37
>> An: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: [POLL] Maven and Apache
>> Flex
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 11/29/12 11:48 AM, "christofer.dutz@c-ware.de"
>> <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Alex,
>>> 
>>> a local maven repo is on the machine the build is running ... that's
>>> one repo per machine. Think of it as a Maven-Cache. So if I run the
>>> build on my machine, the artifacts are available on that machine, but
>>> not on any other one.
>> Ah ok. I get it now.
>>> 
>>> My idea was that if the build is set to "non-interactive" and the
>>> mojo detects missing runtime artifacts from Adobe, that it would
>>> output the license agreement and at the bottom output a message, that
>>> if the user accepts this agreement he has to run the build again and
>>> provide a system-property
>>> "-DIAcceptTheAdobeLicense=34854395704857204572098457024870" (The
>>> number is generated every time the mojo is run and no
>>> IAcceptTheAdobeLicense property is prvided). The generated token is
>>> saved in a place the plugin can find it again the next time it runs
>>> (temp-dir). If the token is provided in the next run, the mojo will
>>> download the stuff and deploy it on the local machine only.
>>> 
>>> Ok so this is not 100% fool-proof but at least as fool-proof as
>>> creating an automated http-downloader that checks the "i agree"
>>> checkbox on the Adobe download.
>> I will try to get this approved.
>> 
>> One more question about the AIR SDK zip:  Why do you need pom.xml
>> files in the subfolders of the AIR SDK to run the tools in there?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Alex Harui
>> Flex SDK Team
>> Adobe Systems, Inc.
>> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>> 
> 
> --
> Alex Harui
> Flex SDK Team
> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
> 

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


Mime
View raw message