First, I'm not saying we must change structure to make Flex SDK only-maven-compliant. I'm saying that we need some refactoring to be compliant with all BMS (not only maven). Think in some java project that could be build using ANT, Maven, Gradle and so on... ¿ok?
Second, we are dragging lots of problems cause no changes were made before. We are here to evolve the SDK to be better and that requires changes that make more powerful the SDK (in this case to buy build more easily and by more build systems). I think the tool refactors implied in tools like Fb or Intellij will be of low impact and should not be a problem to stop evolution, since is re-structure of the sdk to be a more standard piece of software... maybe I'm talking from a feeling that this not should be a huge showstopper. I think this will be lots more benefitial than the possible derivated problems that could generate. 2012/5/24 Jonathan Campos <jonbcam...@gmail.com> > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Om <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Breaking existing tools like Flash Builder, IntelliJ just to make Maven > > work is not the best idea. We are at a very delicate point in terms of > end > > users' confidence and trust. Lets not break the camel's back. > > > > I 100% agree with Om. We don't want to get into the (very) bad habit of > "we're going to make a change and you need to move with us". Tool > developers don't like that very much. I think the fewer waves we make to > the ecosystem during the 4.x branch the better. > > -- > Jonathan Campos > -- Carlos Rovira Director de Tecnología M: +34 607 22 60 05 F: +34 912 35 57 77 <http://www.codeoscopic.com> CODEOSCOPIC S.A. <http://www.codeoscopic.com> Avd. del General Perón, 32 Planta 10, Puertas P-Q 28020 Madrid
