You don't need to put that on all modules... you can use one of 2 approaches: 1 - Add this on parent pom. So all child will use the external dependencies. Create a parent for modules if you don't have. 2 - Use a managed dependency with scope import, take a look on maven docs for that.
VELO On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Marc Speck <[email protected]> wrote: > I fully agree that loading swz in modules makes sense in some cases. I > estimate though that this happens by far not as often as you want to have > all required swz loaded in the application. I read in your reasoning that > you estimate this differently, ok. In any case, downloading the swz should > happen extremely seldom. > > I have a project with more than 20 modules. Putting all those into the > application project is not feasible. So I have to list all SDK dependencies > as in the post above in the pom. This is not very elegant. So I suggest an > additional parameter that externalizes all swz upon request (and might be > independent of whether it is a module or application). > > What do you think? > Marc > > > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote: > >> That is my point, may make sense a module with a RSL..... >> Imagine I have my app, it loads framework.swz... but no charts, no rpc.... >> >> The, I have a module somewhere that needs charts.... then this module load >> the datavisualization.swz. I see as a complete viable scenario.... you >> don't wanna you main app loading everything, just let's modules load >> whatever they need to run. >> >> So I can't assume RSLs on modules means external. You will need to set >> your scopes to external. But, when the app and the modules are built >> together I do know that the app already loaded the RSL, so I can set the RSL >> on modules as external. >> >> >> VELO >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Marc Speck <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I'm fine with using moduleFiles or any other parameter to cover the use >>> case that modules do not load any signed RSLs. I'd say that this is even the >>> default use case for modules. So I'd suggest to change the default behavior >>> for Flex 4 modules to scope the Flex SDK libs as external. Additionally, to >>> cover the case where modules load RSL, add an other parameter within >>> moduleFiles. >>> >>> Why not also use moduleFiles for projects that have only a module and no >>> application? This is then a marker to externalize the SDK libs. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> Marc >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Well, there is no solution for this on flexmojos side.... >>>> I mean, may make sense in some scenario to have the RSL on the >>>> module.... let's say something only used on the module so you wish to only >>>> be loaded on modules.... >>>> >>>> Flexmojos can handle that when modulesFiles is used.... if app has >>>> RSLs, the modules doesn't need to have it too. >>>> >>>> >>>> VELO >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
