Here's a zip: http://home.apache.org/~aharui/FlexJS/ApacheFlexJSJSOnly.zip
I only tried on Mac. I didn't realize we had an NPM package that overlaid AIR/Flash into an SDK folder. I agree that would be better than Ant. What I would really like to see, but not sure if it is possible, is to have folks actually visit the Adobe site to choose their AIR and Flash SDK version, but somehow get other code to manage the download. That would get us out of the hassle of presenting license acceptance dialogs. I'm guessing that Adobe may want to change what customers see when they go get AIR and Flash SDKs some day. That's why I thought about having the compiler search for a download and expand it. Thoughts? -Alex On 9/7/17, 9:55 AM, "Michael Schmalle" <teotigraphix...@gmail.com> wrote: >If I could get a zip to just try it, I am all for this. > >On the plus side, if you can get a zip only for windows and documented >setup for quick testing, I think this goes a long way with being able to >develop the compiler and develop the ui framework separation a lot >cleaner. > >Getting stuff ripped away from the Flash player and Adobe in a new project >is #1. Plus the lightweight nature of not having to download the AIR SDK >for dev and just js. > >@Om what would be the difference between npm and a zip? > >Mike > >On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:48 PM, Piotr Zarzycki ><piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> >wrote: > >> Hi Alex, >> >> Since you fake airglobal.swc and playerglobal.swc maybe it will also >>work >> with Moonshine. I will try to do same operation as you did and see >>whether >> I will not have previous errors. >> >> Thanks! >> Piotr >> >> 2017-09-07 18:43 GMT+02:00 OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com>: >> >> > This is a big big deal. Thanks for getting this done. >> > >> > I would be very interested in the non-installer, simple zip file >> download. >> > >> > I dont care much for Ant as a requirement, I would rather continue >> > maintaining the npm FlexJS package for AIR download + setup. >> > >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Om >> > >> > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Hi folks, >> > > >> > > Yesterday, I was able to manually create a folder of files that >> contained >> > > no Adobe AIR or Adobe Flash files and still was an acceptable >> Flex/FlexJS >> > > SDK for Adobe Flash Builder and allowed me to compile >> DataBindingExample >> > > for JSFlex output only (it did not build a SWF). >> > > >> > > This is interesting because it could significantly change the way we >> > > package FlexJS releases. We could have a default package that is a >> > > ready-to-use zip of this folder of files. Then the Installer is no >> > longer >> > > needed if your goal is just to install FlexJS, fire up an IDE, and >>see >> > how >> > > it works in the browser without Flash and you don't need to see how >>it >> > > looks in Flash. >> > > >> > > If this sound good to folks, I will try to alter the Ant build >>scripts >> to >> > > produce such a package (maybe some other volunteer can take on doing >> this >> > > in Maven). In case you are wondering, what I did was fake some of >>the >> > > Adobe files that Flash Builder looks for by making copies of some >> Apache >> > > files. For example, I copied the js.swc that contains the Object >> > > definition for the browser to be airglobal.swc and playerglobal.swc. >> So >> > > far, it appears that Flash Builder is only checking for existence of >> > > files, not actual classes in these files. But we might hit some bug >> > later >> > > as we test this further. >> > > >> > > Then the next question is, what do folks do who want to get SWF >>output? >> > > We could try to write a script for the Installer that downloads the >>AIR >> > > and Flash SDK and puts them in the right places in the SDK folder >>but >> it >> > > will run into the same memory limits that is currently a problem for >> the >> > > Installer. We could write a new AIR app that brings down the AIR >>and >> > > Flash SDKs. We could provide Ant scripts that download and deploy >>the >> > > Adobe bits. I think we already have bash scripts that do this. Not >> sure >> > > if folks on Windows will be happy with that or not. >> > > >> > > Using Ant has the advantage that it works on Windows, Mac and Linux. >> > Bash >> > > scripts require a shell on Windows. I believe AIR apps have issues >>on >> > > Linux. >> > > >> > > We could try to teach the compiler to look for and expand the AIR >>SDK >> if >> > > it finds that someone specified SWF output but the AIR SDK is not >> found. >> > > It would look in Downloads folders for the most recent AIR SDK >>package >> > > name. So folks who want SWF output go to the Adobe site, download >>an >> AIR >> > > SDK and then run the compiler. >> > > >> > > This does make SWF output somewhat "second class" and I still >>believe >> > that >> > > folks who want strong-typing and will be using modules will benefit >> from >> > > at least testing in a Flash/AIR runtime, but I think it makes the >> > releases >> > > truly appear independent from Adobe. >> > > >> > > Thoughts? >> > > -Alex >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Piotr Zarzycki >> >> mobile: +48 880 859 557 >> skype: zarzycki10 >> >> LinkedIn: >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linke >>din.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7C%7C68c0e7a2fd034d6f13a708d4f61152a >>d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636404001645731007&sdata=T >>C5%2FgDQcJyBbfvHQur%2BDYniytQW2qJnfr7ecfdw3S5U%3D&reserved=0 >> >><https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpl.link >>edin.com%2Fin%2Fpiotr-zarzycki-92a53552&data=02%7C01%7C%7C68c0e7a2fd034d6 >>f13a708d4f61152ad%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6364040016 >>45731007&sdata=UWm2ZgY5cUE7KS%2BvQNEN45mkYF7bAImhSdezl%2FHnD%2Bo%3D&reser >>ved=0> >>
