IntelliJ doesn't use FlexMojos or Maven directly, for Flex. Instead, it relies on the configuration report FlexMojos can dump. It runs compc/mxmlc itself, as necessary (There are a few different modes for this, 2 of which enable parallel compilation by building a dependency graph--a very nice feature for larger projects), and points them at the configuration report. Hence, what it builds is what FlexMojos would build. My experience has been that it deals with incremental rebuilds perfectly.
In my configuration (I'm using IDEA 10.5.1 Ultimate, the latest release), I've disabled auto-generation of the configuration report, because I've found that feature, which uses FlexMojos goals that no longer exist in FM4, it to be unreliable at best. When I run a command line Maven build, the configuration report is generated and IDEA just uses it as-is. If I make changes to any of the Flex code in our project in IDEA, it is correctly incrementally rebuilt. If I do a command line build with Maven, the next build done by IDEA is not incremental (the .cache files no longer match the .swc/.swf files), but any further builds (until my next CLB) are incremental. Any time I make a pom.xml change to a FlexMojos module, I do a CLB to dump the latest configuration report. I have to echo Christofer's sentiments. Of all the tools out there for developing Flex applications, Flex/FlashBuilder is the worst I've used. My previous team was fully Eclipse when I got hired. After 2 weeks of using FlexBuilder (3 at the time), I was so frustrated I figured out how to get everything working in IDEA, switched over and never looked back. At this point, that team is 2/3 IDEA and only 1/3 still use Eclipse/FlashBuilder (they've since upgraded through 4 and now 4.5, for those sufficiently hidebound to stick out the Eclipse experience to its ultimate futility). Naturally that's a developer preference, so I can understand having no control over it. I chock it up to Stockholm syndome. On my previous team (my current team mandates using IntelliJ IDEA, so we don't have to worry about it), they didn't use the FlexBuilder goal either. Instead, they setup and maintained the .actionScriptProperties and other Flex/FlashBuilder-related dot files manually, and committed them to Subversion. The FlexBuilder goal has never been well maintained, so we just found it simpler to setup and maintain those files ourselves. The lack of maintenance/support for that goal is no fault of VELO's, by the way; it's not reasonable or correct to expect him to maintain a goal he did not create and himself has no use for. Hence I understand its removal when he rewrote FM for 4. He removed the generateConfigReportSwc and generateConfigReportSwf goals used by IDEA at the same time and for the same (valid) reason. Ultimately, if those goals are important to the community, the community needs to step up to maintain them. Hope this helps, Bryan Turner On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:22 PM, J_A_X <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Christofer, > > Thing is, I don't have a choice as to which developers use what, and > most use FB. I'm curious though, how do you use IntelliJ with > FlexMojos? I'm fairly sure that IntelliJ can run maven and such, but > how does it work with incremental builds since FM doesn't seem to be > very good with that. > > > On Aug 8, 4:02 am, Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Just to add my 50ct: > > In my experience FB really really sucks as soon as you are dealing > > with a lot of different Maven modules. We mooved away from FB after > > constantly wasting time while waiting for FB to be usable again. We > > are currently using IntelliJ for more than 2 Years and everytime I > > have to put my hands on the FB I feel like mooving out of my nice, > > warm flat, back into a Cave ;-) > > > > With IntelliJ you don't need any big plugins. It seems to work nicely > without. > > > > Chris > > > > 2011/8/8 J_A_X <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there any way for you to do a quick port? I would be more than > > > happy to spend some time getting this to work with FM4. > > > > > On Aug 7, 9:28 pm, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 10:14 PM, J_A_X <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> > FM4 was still in beta. Most enterprise developers *do not touch* > > >> > anything with a beta tag because it is extremely risky and can break > > >> > the build. Even recent projects I've been on (where I had no say > > >> > about which version of FM we were using) was using 3.8 (I think?) > > >> > because it did everything we wanted it to do. > > > > >> > Trust me, those same people would want that same goal in FM4, but > they > > >> > haven't updated because it still had that beta moniker to it. Even > a > > >> > release candidate is considered risky for any large enterprise RIA. > > > > >> I should had released the pre-alpha as 4.0... FM3 I don't even run > the > > >> tests for years now... but whatever.... I shall probably adopt some > ubuntu > > >> like versioning.... 1108... year+month, not sure about that... > > > > >> I don't understand why you would remove a functionality altogether > > > > >> > unless there was a very good reason. I can understand if you don't > > >> > support it, but remove it? At least leave it in the code for people > > >> > to update it through github if need be. > > > > >> Complete new codebase. FM is all about new code. But I don't really > wanna > > >> keep a piece of code that I don't know what it does and there is > nobody > > >> maintain it, it is just more stuff to people complain that do not work > and > > >> that bothers me. > > > > >> > Isn't that the whole point of open source? > > > > >> Sure, sure, there are tons of contributions on flexmojos.... not sure > if 10 > > >> lines of code got changed on last 6 months... > > >> Well, here it is flashbuilder goal to prove community commitment. > > > > > -- > > > 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/ > -- 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/
