incubator-flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chema Balsas <jbal...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Falcon SDKSWCTests
Date Wed, 05 Dec 2012 02:08:07 GMT
Ok, I've submitted a patch for that (
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33286). I've checked and those
were the only projects including that file.

I've also checked, and the content of version.properties always seems to be
"build=0". I've even compiled without including the file and everything
seems to be working. Could we just remove those references completely or
there may be some other side effects?

Chema

2012/12/5 Gordon Smith <gosmith@adobe.com>

> In that case, let's move -include-file option for version.properties back
> out of compile-config.xml and into the <compc> task.
>
> - Gordon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chema Balsas [mailto:jbalsas@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 5:22 PM
> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Falcon SDKSWCTests
>
> Hi Cyril,
>
> The version.properties file is created and removed inside the compile
> target for those projects.
>
> It is generated at the beginning of the target by:
> <echo file="${FLEX_HOME}/frameworks/version.properties"
> append="false">build=${build.number}</echo>
>
> And then removed at the end by:
> <delete file="${FLEX_HOME}/frameworks/version.properties"/>
>
> which is why you shouldn't find it ;)
>
> 2012/12/5 Cyrill Zadra <cyrill.zadra@gmail.com>
>
> > Hey Chema
> >
> > In the follwing compile-config.xml is the version.properties included.
> >
> > rpc
> > spark
> > spark_dmv
> >
> >     <include-file>
> >         <name>version.properties</name>
> >         <path>../../version.properties</path>
> >     </include-file>
> >
> > In my builded flex sdk it does not exists. Is that part really used or
> > can it be removed? Or does anyone know how this version.properties is
> > generated?
> >
> > Cyrill
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Chema Balsas <jbalsas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > @Cyril Thanks for noticing!
> > >
> > > @Gordon You're welcome! I'm really happy to see all this movement
> > > around Falcon/FalconJS lately :)
> > >
> > >
> > > 2012/12/1 Gordon Smith <gosmith@adobe.com>
> > >
> > >> Oops! Thank you @Chema!
> > >>
> > >> Sent from my iPad
> > >>
> > >> On Nov 30, 2012, at 7:09 PM, "Cyrill Zadra"
> > >> <cyrill.zadra@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi Gordon
> > >> >
> > >> >> @Cyril: Thanks for your help with introducing the
> > >> >> compile-config.xml
> > >> files so that we can more easily make Falcon JUnit tests that
> > >> compile
> > each
> > >> SDK SWC.
> > >> >
> > >> > That wasn't me .. I think that work was done by Chema Balsas (see
> > [1]).
> > >> >
> > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33226
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Gordon Smith <gosmith@adobe.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> >> @Cyril: Thanks for your help with introducing the
> > >> >> compile-config.xml
> > >> files so that we can more easily make Falcon JUnit tests that
> > >> compile
> > each
> > >> SDK SWC.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Now that we have one such test - for compiling framework.swc -
> > passing,
> > >> would anybody like to work on investigating the status of other
> > >> tests
> > that
> > >> compile rpc.swc, mx.swc, spark.swc, etc.? We need to figure out
> > >> whether
> > the
> > >> SDK source code needs to change because Falcon is pickier than the
> > >> old compiler, or whether Falcon has AS bugs that need to be fixed.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> - Gordon
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
>

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