On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 01:19, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > I took a really, really quick look over your code. > So if I get it correctly, DependencyProcessorMojo is supposed to create > RSL for all dependencies of a given project? > Yes, transitively by default. > Ignore the lines above if that is not your intention and then tell me what > you wanna do. > Well, I have to say, that scares me, and scares me a lot. Imagine for some > reason you lost your internet connection in a given period of time. Then, > instead of getting the RSLs from the right place you would end generating > tons of RSLs that may or may not be correct. It does trigger lot's of red > lights on my head. > I can see how it help's users circumventing maven correct lifecycle, yes, > make things easier, agreed, but, also make then less reliable. > I can see your point > Why? Well, the library.SWF (from the 3rd party SWC) has a given checksum. > Then you optimize that SWF, which will have a new checksum. In order to get > this RSL usable, you need to update this checksum inside the original SWC, > that will break maven md5, sha1 and signatures. This is really really bad. > Agreed, but for what I've seen until now most flex libraries doesn't publish their RSL equivalent... > To deal with the problem correctly, whoever is publishing the SWC must > publish the optimized SWF as well. This is specially trickier when some as3 > metadata must be preserved, so it is the role of the person that produces > the SWC to produce the optimized SWF as well. > Sure, I could accept that, but, FM users already proven that if there is a > easier lifecycle that will potentially lead to the problems if you don't > really know what you are doing, people will go the easy road then write a > huge blog, twitter or whatever saying how flexmojos screw their life.... > not blaming on you, just saying what already happen with me more then once. > Not really inclined on add such thing into FM code. Not that I did any > code last 6 months ;) > Well, I can live having that code on my personal flexmojos installation for use in-house :) The reason behind that mojo is we wish to migrate to RSLs but we needed a simple and easy way to generate RSLs for those dependencies not publishing the SWF file. I don't actually know if it is possible to make that goal runnable only outside of the build lifecycle, like the default maven installer mojo... > > About the InstallerMojo, what is the value it brings over OtimizerMojo with > optimizeRsls set to false? Am I missing something? > Humm... in flexmojos-3 there's not an optimizeRsls configuration parameter and I didn't want to break too much. Anyway, the reason I started that mojo is the optimization process fails, or, better, it ignores my keepAs3Metadatas directive which is the main reason I started to contribute on this project. If I can get the OptimizerMojos to correctly preserve my metadatas I can drop the InstallerMojo and add the optimizeRsls parameter to the former, but it looks to me an `optimize` goal should ever perform optimization :) Can you help me with that metadata? I'm not confident with the SWF format or mxmlc API, can you please check if I did something wrong? Thank you, Roberto -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Flex Mojos" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/flex-mojos http://flexmojos.sonatype.org/
