Just a suggestion. Never use at your version the same name we use at FDK released at our repository. And why that?! It does produces errors.
Try to answer this question: Does flex compiler 3.2.0.3958 contains license.jar? The right answer is NO. If at your machine it does, your maven repository is corrupted! So use creative version naming conventions. IE: 3.2.0-fb, 3.2.0-pro, 3.2.0-free. *But don't use 3.2.0.3958*. I do call it 3.2.0-fb3, this avoid lot's of problems. If you call it 3.2.0.3958, someone on a fresh machine will download MPL version from flex-mojos repository. That will include the watermark and make your build inconsistent. I'm thinking on change install mojo to not allow you (or even myself) to overwrite an existent version. So, if 3.2.0.3958 is already at REPO you can't install it again. What do you think of that? VELO On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 9:31 PM, RedBugz Software <[email protected]> wrote: > > Just to confirm, the maven output in the compiler for the license > should look like this: > > -default-size 500 375 > -licenses.license flexbuilder3 nnnn-nnnn-nnnn-nnnn-nnnn-nnnn > -load-config /Users/logan/....... > > or > > -licenses.license flexbuilder3 nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn > > I think the problem is most likely not having the correct license.jar > on the classpath or the wrong version. Confirm that archiva has it in > the correct version and check the > .m2/repository/com/adobe/flex/compiler/license directories of the > machine with the working build and the machine with the failing build. > There has to be a difference somewhere. > > Logan > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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?hl=en?hl=en http://blog.flex-mojos.info/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
