Ok .. just had a look at this caching thing ... have to admit that I haven't used it before ... but what I just saw certainly looks like I should have a look at it ;-)
2011/4/28 Davis Ford <[email protected]>: > On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Christofer Dutz > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Well I guess that the text-layout stuff in the flex sdk is version 1.1 >> but the sdk version containing it is 4.1 so everything in the sdk is >> deployed under the version 4.1 >> Actually keeping track of the individual versions of parts of the sdk >> would certainly make Velo go nuts withing weeks ;-) So you have to >> think of the version more like "give me the version of textLayout that >> is shipped with flex sdk 4.1.0.604" and not requesting the actual >> version of the lib. >> >> Chris >> > > Right, I can concede that keeping track of this will make you loopy, > but I guess what I was wondering is if they are binary compatible. If > I depend on signed RSLs, and I spec copy-flex-resources, it fails > trying to copy the textLayout 4.1 swz file to the webapp dir. > > Since this artifact doesn't exist in sonatype, I can deploy it locally > to get past this, but I don't want to do that if they aren't binary > compatible. > > -- > 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/ > -- 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/
