I built FM 6.0.1 against Flex 4.6 so per default FM will Import all of The framework libs in 4.6 except if you specify otherwise. I guess you didn't Import the Framework-POM but just the libs you needed. That causes Maven to use the ones you didn't specify in Version 4.6. You could avoid this by importing the Framework-pom AFTER declaring the dependencies you are using. Or you could do as I described here: https://flexmojos.atlassian.net/wiki/display/FLEXMOJOS/Flexmojos+6.x in the section using the dependencyManagement poms, cause this will not add dependencies but manage the Versions of all of the Flex artifacts so you could omit the Versions in all Flex dependencies.
Chris ________________________________________ Von: mscharp [michael.sch...@fmr.com] Gesendet: Freitag, 13. September 2013 01:06 An: dev@flex.apache.org Betreff: RE: AW: FlexMojos 6, Flex sdk 4.10.0.20130801, and getAdvancedTelemetry() I've updated my projects to start building with your 6.0.1 version of FM. I haven't had a chance to really get into it yet, but the first things I'm seeing are these warnings. Any idea why, as I'm building against 4.10.0.20130801? [WARNING] The POM for com.adobe.flex:compiler:pom:4.6.0.23201 is missing, no dependency information available Downloading: https://repo. CENSORED.com/content/groups/level0. CENSORED /com/adobe/flex/compiler/mxmlc/4.6.0.23201/mxmlc-4.6.0.23201.pom [WARNING] The POM for com.adobe.flex.compiler:mxmlc:jar:4.6.0.23201 is missing, no dependency information available Downloading: https://repo. CENSORED.com/content/groups/level0. CENSORED /com/adobe/flex/compiler/digest/4.6.0.23201/digest-4.6.0.23201.pom [WARNING] The POM for com.adobe.flex.compiler:digest:jar:4.6.0.23201 is missing, no dependency information available Downloading: https://repo. CENSORED.com/content/groups/level0. CENSORED /com/adobe/flex/compiler/optimizer/4.6.0.23201/optimizer-4.6.0.23201.pom [WARNING] The POM for com.adobe.flex.compiler:optimizer:jar:4.6.0.23201 is missing, no dependency information available Downloading: https://repo.CENSORED.com/content/groups/level0. CENSORED /com/adobe/flex/compiler/asdoc/4.6.0.23201/asdoc-4.6.0.23201.pom [WARNING] The POM for com.adobe.flex.compiler:asdoc:jar:4.6.0.23201 is missing, no dependency information available Downloading: https://repo.CENSORED.com/content/groups/level0.CENSORED/com/adobe/flex/compiler/swcdepends/4.6.0.23201/swcdepends-4.6.0.23201.pom [WARNING] The POM for com.adobe.flex.compiler:swcdepends:jar:4.6.0.23201 is missing, no dependency information available I can post poms if it helps. On a the issue of the RSLs, I have them working and I will post what I have online so that anyone else wondering will have something to help them if needed. Michael From: christofer.d...@c-ware.de [via Apache Flex Development] [mailto:ml-node+s2333347n29598...@n4.nabble.com] Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 10:32 AM To: Scharp, Michael Subject: AW: AW: FlexMojos 6, Flex sdk 4.10.0.20130801, and getAdvancedTelemetry() I would expect the thing to blow up in my face ... yes :-) Cause you would be mixing different Versions of libs ... I don't think that would be a good idea. If you however want to use a library (swc/rsl) however that should be possible as Long as the rsl/swc doesn't rely on changed API. But if you are talking about modules in the same maven build, I would stronly suggest not to try that. Chris ________________________________________ Von: Avi Kessner [[hidden email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29598&i=0>] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. September 2013 18:24 An: [hidden email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29598&i=1> Betreff: Re: AW: FlexMojos 6, Flex sdk 4.10.0.20130801, and getAdvancedTelemetry() If one pom file in a project uses FM 6 and another uses 3 would you expect that to cause conflicts? On 12 Sep 2013 19:19, "[hidden email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29598&i=2>" <[hidden email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29598&i=3>> wrote: > Well actually FM should build your application with any mavenized FDK you > throw at it. Unless something has changed in more recent Versions of Apache > Flex. FM automatically uses the Compiler Version it was compiled agains, if > you don't explicitly fix a Version by using the plugin dependency. > Otherwise you're free to use whatever Version you like. > > The benefit of signed RSLs was even bigger (in my oppinion). As the Flex > RSLs for an application were only loaded once no matter what URL you > visited and it usually even survived a Cache cleanup. As soon as a SWZ was > loaded, the Flashplayer sort of installed it locally and as soon as an > application needed it again, it simply loaded it without having to download > it again. > > The reason for you having to explicitly list every dependency that Needs a > non-Default scope, is mavens inability to overload scopes. So the framworks > master pom has normal dependencies to it's libs and if you simply reference > that, you wouldn't utilize the shared-lib concept of RSLs but use normal > SWCs for compilation, resulting in a way bigger Output file. So if you want > to migrate your Project to Apache Flex you have to replace every Caching > scope with "rsl". > > Chris > > > ________________________________________ > Von: mscharp [[hidden email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29598&i=4>] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. September 2013 18:03 > An: [hidden email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29598&i=5> > Betreff: RE: FlexMojos 6, Flex sdk 4.10.0.20130801, and > getAdvancedTelemetry() > > Thanks for the responses Chris. Yeah, FM is a beast to build. I can't > say enough "Thank Yous" for taking over the project. > > So, my understanding was that FM had to be built against the version of > the FDK you wanted to use. I'm assuming this is incorrect. Has anyone > tried using FM 6.0.1 with the 4.10 FDK? My only question with it having to > do with the getAdvancedTelemetry() function that I had to add to the FM > source code. > > As far as the RSLs, I read in the release notes that they aren't signed, > and that it only make sense to use RSLs if you are serving multiple flex > applications from the same domain... which we are. So, previously in our > pom files we had: > > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > > <artifactId>framework</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>caching</scope> > </dependency> > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > > <artifactId>textLayout</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>caching</scope> > </dependency> > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > > <artifactId>charts</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>caching</scope> > </dependency> > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > > <artifactId>rpc</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>caching</scope> > </dependency> > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > <artifactId>mx</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>caching</scope> > </dependency> > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > > <artifactId>advancedgrids</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>caching</scope> > </dependency> > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > > <artifactId>spark</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>caching</scope> > </dependency> > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > > <artifactId>sparkskins</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>caching</scope> > </dependency> > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > > <artifactId>spark_dmv</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>caching</scope> > </dependency> > > Currently I'm not listing any of these as dependencies in our new poms. > I've been following what I've been able to find on the web as far as > standard practices for what needs to be included in the pom files, but a > lot of them look a bit different than what we currently have in our poms. > So, I'm not sure if I still need those dependencies listed or not. If I > do, would the scope be "rsl" instead of "caching" and now look more like > this? > > <dependency> > > <groupId>com.adobe.flex.framework</groupId> > > <artifactId>spark_dmv</artifactId> > > <version>${flex.sdk.version}</version> > <type>swc</type> > <scope>rsl</scope> > </dependency> > > Again, thanks everyone for the help. > > Michael > > From: [hidden email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29598&i=6> [via > Apache Flex Development] [mailto: > [hidden email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29598&i=7>] > Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2013 6:00 AM > To: Scharp, Michael > Subject: AW: FlexMojos 6, Flex sdk 4.10.0.20130801, and > getAdvancedTelemetry() > > Yeah ... but in Flexmojos you can have a dependency of type "swc", "rsl" > and "caching". Depending on the type of dependency it loads different files > from maven "swc", "swf" or "swz". The test-cases utilizing the signed rsls > have dependencies of type "Caching" and therefore maven Looks for swz > files, which it doesn't find and therefore the build Fails, causing the > testsuite to fail. > > Chris > > ________________________________________ > Von: Justin Mclean [[hidden > email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29584&i=0>] > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 12. September 2013 02:45 > An: [hidden email]</user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=29584&i=1> > Betreff: Re: FlexMojos 6, Flex sdk 4.10.0.20130801, and > getAdvancedTelemetry() > > Hi, > > > This is because we don't have any signed RSLs (SWZ Files). > Why do you need signed files? Apache Flex does come with RSLs they are > just not signed. > > Thanks, > Justin > ________________________________ > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion > below: > > http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/FlexMojos-6-Flex-sdk-4-10-0-20130801-and-getAdvancedTelemetry-tp29528p29584.html > To unsubscribe from FlexMojos 6, Flex sdk 4.10.0.20130801, and > getAdvancedTelemetry(), click here< > >. > NAML< > http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml > > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/FlexMojos-6-Flex-sdk-4-10-0-20130801-and-getAdvancedTelemetry-tp29528p29594.html > Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ________________________________ If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/FlexMojos-6-Flex-sdk-4-10-0-20130801-and-getAdvancedTelemetry-tp29528p29598.html To unsubscribe from FlexMojos 6, Flex sdk 4.10.0.20130801, and getAdvancedTelemetry(), click here<http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=29528&code=bWljaGFlbC5zY2hhcnBAZm1yLmNvbXwyOTUyOHwtMTU2NDIyNDE0NA==>. NAML<http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml> -- View this message in context: http://apache-flex-development.2333347.n4.nabble.com/FlexMojos-6-Flex-sdk-4-10-0-20130801-and-getAdvancedTelemetry-tp29528p29601.html Sent from the Apache Flex Development mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
