Oh, I guess that was the feature Logan mentioned in another thread.

So, in my "real" project the charts are all in a library. Does this
auto-license feature only work for SWFs, not SWCs?

But more importantly, I won't have FB on the build machine, so I really need
to figure this out. Does my <build> look OK? Should I have the <licenses>
tag in the SWC pom or the SWF pom or both?

Thanks


On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote:

> I love to do things automatically on flex-mojos.
>
> If you run it on a machine that does have flexbuilder installed, it will
> take the license from it, automatically.
>
>
> VELO
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Richard Rodseth <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> I am so confused by this license stuff. Any further troubleshooting tips?
>>
>> I have an FB SDK installed. I have a <licenses> tag as below. I've tried
>> with and without dashes, but still get the watermark.
>> Then I tried the same thing in a HelloWorld project just containing an
>> <mx:LineChart> with no series data. No watermark. I removed the <licenses>
>> tag. Still no watermark, but the command line output still  shows the
>> license number on the compiler options, even though I removed the tag!
>>
>>         <build>
>>             <plugins>
>>                 <plugin>
>>                     <groupId>info.flex-mojos</groupId>
>>                     <artifactId>flex-compiler-mojo</artifactId>
>>                     <dependencies>
>>                         <dependency>
>>                             <groupId>com.adobe.flex</groupId>
>>                             <artifactId>compiler</artifactId>
>>                             <version>3.1.0-fb3</version>
>>                             <type>pom</type>
>>                         </dependency>
>>                     </dependencies>
>>                     <extensions>true</extensions>
>>                     <configuration>
>>                          <licenses>
>>                         <flexbuilder3>XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX</flexbuilder3>
>>                         </licenses>
>>                     </configuration>
>>                 </plugin>
>>             </plugins>
>>         </build>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Richard Rodseth <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks. Sorry I missed it.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 6:03 PM, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Wow....
>>>>
>>>> There it is.
>>>>
>>>> http://docs.flex-mojos.info/flex-compiler-mojo/compile-swf-mojo.html#licenses
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> VELO
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Richard Rodseth 
>>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks to Velo's 2.0.3 release, I can now build my projects, but still
>>>>> need to tackle the Data Visualization license issue.
>>>>>
>>>>> I saw the recent thread about pro sdk license issues, with references
>>>>> to a "license tag". Is this documented somewhere? Where does it go? I 
>>>>> didn't
>>>>> see an example in subversion either and couldn't find my answer at
>>>>> http://docs.flex-mojos.info/
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to