@Chris we tested the normal ANT build of the originally donated code. Sorry that I don't have time to test the new versions.
On 2 September 2014 12:22, Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: > @Mihai: Are you testing the Mavenized version or simply the output of the > normal ANT build? > > Chris > > ________________________________________ > Von: Mihai Chira <mihai.ch...@gmail.com> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. September 2014 12:42 > An: dev@flex.apache.org > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSSION] Squiggly 1.0 release candidate 0 > > I hope so. But from what I remember (and I wasn't the main developer > dealing with this), the flex version of the project depended on > classes inside the non-flex version, which means that if the wrong > compiler argument was used, it would also replace the flex-SpellUI > with the non-flex-SpellUI. But again, things may have changed a lot > since then. > > On 2 September 2014 11:38, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> Even if this is not a problem anymore, it might be worth adding a new >>> step to the release verification process to create a project without >>> Flex and make sure that squiggly works well, and the same for a Flex >>> project. >> >> I think this is just a matter of including the right swcs and not all of >> them? >> >> Thanks, >> Justin
