Hi Chris, Thanks Chris, I don't think templates should be in distribution SDK. I think only generated ones. In ANT since it's overlying the repo we can find both, but an IDE using the SDK should not need it, just the generated versions.
El dom, 28 feb 2021 a las 22:08, Christofer Dutz (<christofer.d...@c-ware.de>) escribió: > Hi Carlos, > > no ... the templates weren't created by me ... they always were in the > frameworks dir ... I think the ANT build takes the templates and inserts > variables to generate the real versions. I think I'll try to use these to > do the same with maven ... unfortunately the files have gotten pretty out > of sync. > > But can anyone here tell me if the "template" files need to be in the > distribution? Are they needed for anything? Cause I would just add the > generated versions. > > Chris > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. Februar 2021 16:53 > An: Apache Royale Development <dev@royale.apache.org> > Betreff: Re: [MAVEN DISTRIBUTION] getting the Ant and Maven aligned > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > > I do have some questions: > > - the "framework" directory contains a log of tupples: > > xyz-config-template.xml and xyz-config.xml: Where does the > > xyz-config.xml get generated from the template in the ANT build? (I > > assume it generates them from the templates as part of the build)... > > could we possibly omit the "templates"? It seems as if they are only > > needed to generate the configs for a given set of configured > > properties. If that's the case, we don't need them in the distribution. > > > > I always though the template was created by you when you created the maven > build for Royale. So if you think you can remove templates, I think it > would be good to reduce files if they are not used at all. > > > > - The root element of the flex-config.xml was named "roayale-config" > > in the Maven distribution and "flex-config" in the Ant distribution > > and it contained a reference to the mxml-2009-manifest.xml. Also did > > the Ant version contain a lot more implicit imports as well as a > > fxg-base-class element > > > > > maybe this could be the problem we're facing with fx:Array > > > > So far the changes I found ... I updated the distribution in the > > "features/distribution-allignment" branch. > > > > Great! > > > > > > But I guess I'll keep working on this and try to get the maven > > distribution to have the same directory structure as the Ant one (but > > excluding all the unnecessary stuff). > > > > Chris, let us know when is safe to test, and I'll do a try. > > Thanks for working on this! > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. Februar 2021 12:28 > > An: dev@royale.apache.org > > Betreff: AW: [MAVEN DISTRIBUTION] getting the Ant and Maven aligned > > > > Ok ... regarding the Array problem ... > > > > I have found the "Array.as" file in "compiler-externc" and > > "royale-typedefs/js" ... both are identical ... > > I'm not quite sure which one is used (I'm a bit rusty regarding how > > all of these externs and stuff work together) > > > > I did check and the royale-config.xml lists the mxml-2009-manifest.xml > > (in both the non-swf as well as the with-swf version) so not quite > > sure why adding that to the configuration changes anything. > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. Februar 2021 12:08 > > An: dev@royale.apache.org > > Betreff: [MAVEN DISTRIBUTION] getting the Ant and Maven aligned > > > > Hi all, > > > > so thankfully Carlos re-sent me this link: > > flex-sdk/README_integration_with_Adobe_FlashBuilder.txt at master * > > apache/flex-sdk (github.com)< > > https://github.com/apache/flex-sdk/blob/master/ide/flashbuilder/README > > _integration_with_Adobe_FlashBuilder.txt > > > > > > > So it seems as if we don't have a > > ide/flashbuilder/flashbuilder-config.xml > > with a "express-install-swf" element in it (we don't have the entire > > file) ... do we need this? > > > > Besides that, it seems all is setup as expected. > > > > Will continue looking into other things that could be wrong. > > > > Chris > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > Apache Member & Apache Royale PMC > *Apache Software Foundation* > http://about.me/carlosrovira > -- Carlos Rovira Apache Member & Apache Royale PMC *Apache Software Foundation* http://about.me/carlosrovira