Set the final name.... http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-the-pom.html
<http://maven.apache.org/guides/introduction/introduction-to-the-pom.html> VELO On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Richard Rodseth <[email protected]> wrote: > As described below, I'm producing two different branded SWFs of an > application. Each has it's own pom, specifying the appropriate <sourceFile>. > > They are not currently placed in a repository - rather an external build > system (not based on Maven) picks them up. > I'm not sure if this would be considered bad practice, but is there a way > to give both SWF's the same name, even if the artifactId is different? > It seems that the <name> tag does not affect the output file name, and a > simple output tag puts the file beside the pom, and doesn't include the > SNAPSHOT suffix. > > Not a big deal, as the external build system renames the file(s) anyway, > but I'm curious. > > On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Richard Rodseth <[email protected]>wrote: > >> From the same source tree, I need to compile two monolithic SWFs, each >> with a different CSS compiled in. >> After upgrading to flex-mojos 3.3 I was planning to proceed as Colin >> describes below, unless anyone disagrees. >> Thanks. >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Collin Peters >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> >>> I'm coming in late to this discussion but I thought I would share what >>> we do at our company. We have a large legacy section of Flex code >>> that contains multiple projects, and a few of the projects output >>> multiple applications AND modules. I wanted to compile this legacy >>> code alongside our new projects that use a proper structure by >>> default. It is easily accomplished. The legacy flex projects reside >>> in <base>/flex/, so we created a new directory called <base>/flexV2/ >>> and in this folder we created a folder for EACH artifact output from >>> the legacy projects. So if there was a project that had two >>> application and two modules that would equal four folders. Each >>> folder has a POM which references the necessary source code >>> >>> <build> >>> >>> <sourceDirectory>../../flex/LegacyProject/src</sourceDirectory> >>> <plugins> >>> <plugin> >>> <groupId>org.sonatype.flexmojos</groupId> >>> >>> <artifactId>flexmojos-maven-plugin</artifactId> >>> <version>${flex.mojos.version}</version> >>> <extensions>true</extensions> >>> <configuration> >>> >>> <sourceFile>Application.mxml</sourceFile> >>> >>> <output>${basedir}/../../tomcat-6.0.18/webapps/InTouchFDS/ >>> LegacyProject/Application.swf</output> >>> </configuration> >>> </plugin> >>> >>> This works great and we've had no problems that we haven't been able >>> to solve. Velo noted in a blog post (which I can't find right now) >>> that you should NOT create a new project using a structure like this, >>> but for legacy code it definitely works >>> >>> Collin >>> >>> >>> On Jul 9, 9:43 pm, Darren <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > May I ask what would happen if you had multiple executions of the >>> > compile-swf-mojo, with a different sourceFile specification for each? >>> > >>> > I am not sure which if not all of these SWFs would be attached to the >>> > build though? >>> > >>> > Best, Darren >>> > >>> > On Jun 24, 12:32 pm, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> > > Modules is supported.... and as I said before, I think is possible to >>> use >>> > > the modules support to build application.... if you need this, try >>> modules. >>> > >>> > > VELO >>> > >>> > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 5:01 AM, Kalyan Sarkar < >>> [email protected]>wrote: >>> > >>> > > > Hi Jerome, >>> > >>> > > > We are facing a similar problem. In our multi-module project we >>> have >>> > > > multiple flex applications (mxml) for each module which need to be >>> > > > compiled into individual swfs, because the swfs are loaded >>> > > > dynamically. At present we do not use flex-mojos. We simply run the >>> > > > mxmlc command line compiler from maven-antrun-plugin for each >>> > > > application and it takes a lot of time to build. Therefore I am >>> > > > looking at a solution that can generate as many swfs for as many >>> > > > applications in each module. >>> > >>> > > > I understand that our project structure violates the basic Maven >>> > > > philosophy of 'one artifact per pom', but I would drive me mad if I >>> > > > were to put each of 200+ applications in 200+ modules and have 200+ >>> > > > poms for each of them. It seems that none of the available Maven >>> > > > plugins aor Ant tasks support this feature. I am looking at FCSH >>> and >>> > > > the compiler API and it looks like they have got memory leaks! >>> > >>> > > > Jerome, can you give some example poms and the change to made in >>> the >>> > > > flex-mojos. >>> > >>> > > > Regards, >>> > > > Kalyan Sarkar >>> > >>> > > > On Jun 23, 7:15 am, James Cook <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > > > > Jakob, I'm not second guessing your architecture in any way. I >>> know >>> > > > > that these things can come about for many different reasons. I >>> just >>> > > > > wanted to mention that we find ourselves in the same position at >>> time >>> > > > > and were accustomed to the any script that compiled dozens of >>> swfs. >>> > > > > (Especially font files and shared libraries.) >>> > >>> > > > > Now we package those shared libraries as a swc in its own pom. >>> And a >>> > > > > library that is shared amongst many swfs in the same project >>> becomes >>> > > > > just one module (swc) in a multi-module project. >>> > >>> > > > > just 2 cents... >>> > >>> > > > > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 9:35 PM, jakob.kuelzer< >>> [email protected]> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > >>> > > > > > Hey *, >>> > >>> > > > > > thanks for all your great advise. Unfortunately they don't >>> really >>> > > > > > apply to my scenario. We have in fact 5 applications (that >>> means >>> > > > > > mx:Application containers) in one project. Non of those are >>> really >>> > > > > > big, its just smaller bits. In order to make packaging and >>> deployments >>> > > > > > easier it would have been nice to get functionality like this >>> but if >>> > > > > > it doesn't work it doesn't work. ;) >>> > >>> > > > > > Time for some ANT magic. ;) >>> > >>> > > > > > Cheers, >>> > > > > > Jakob >>> > >>> > > > > > On Jun 22, 4:37 pm, jerome creignou <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > > > > >> Hi, >>> > >>> > > > > >> I would like to share with you, how we deal with this problem. >>> > >>> > > > > >> We also have a Maven project that produces multiple artifacts. >>> > > > Actually >>> > > > > >> there is 1 application, N modules and others resources (CSS, >>> images) >>> > > > in each >>> > > > > >> flex maven project. >>> > > > > >> The trick is to declare a JAR packaging for the project >>> instead of SWF >>> > > > and >>> > > > > >> then put anything you need (SWFs,CSS,...) inside the resulting >>> jar. (I >>> > > > had >>> > > > > >> to patch flex-mojo to get this working since compiler mojo >>> uses >>> > > > > >> ${pom.packaging} for the output file extension.) >>> > >>> > > > > >> To build my webapp, I declare the dependency to my special >>> jar, and >>> > > > unpack >>> > > > > >> it using the dependency plugin (dependency:unpack) to the >>> > > > target/webapp >>> > > > > >> directory. >>> > >>> > > > > >> I can post some poms, if you need more details. >>> > >>> > > > > >> Hope this helps. >>> > > > > >> Jerome >>> > >>> > > > > >> 2009/6/22 Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> >>> > >>> > > > > >> > The only other idea I had is use modules support to build >>> your >>> > > > > >> > applications... but I don't know if that work, nor if work >>> well. >>> > >>> > > > > >> > VELO >>> > >>> > > > > >> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:57 PM, jakob.kuelzer < >>> > > > [email protected]>wrote: >>> > >>> > > > > >> >> Hey Marvin, >>> > > > > >> >> thanks for your quick reply. I stumbled accross this one >>> too, not >>> > > > very >>> > > > > >> >> satisfying though. I'll probably have to revert back to an >>> Ant >>> > > > > >> >> buildscript... :S >>> > >>> > > > > >> >> Cheers, >>> > > > > >> >> Jakob >>> > >>> > > > > >> >> On Jun 22, 1:12 pm, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > > > > >> >> > They only way I know is this: >>> > >>> > > > >>> http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-using-one-source-directory.... >>> > >>> > > > > >> >> > < >>> > >>> > > > >>> http://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-using-one-source-directory... >>> .> >>> > > > > >> >> > VELO >>> > >>> > > > > >> >> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:43 PM, jakob.kuelzer < >>> > > > [email protected] >>> > > > > >> >> >wrote: >>> > >>> > > > > >> >> > > Howdy *, >>> > > > > >> >> > > I'm playing around with flexmojos and I really like the >>> Idea of >>> > > > using >>> > > > > >> >> > > Maven for compiling flex apps into SWFs. However in the >>> current >>> > > > > >> >> > > project setup we have multiple applications in one >>> project to >>> > > > reuse >>> > > > > >> >> > > stylesheets, assets, etc. >>> > >>> > > > > >> >> > > I know this is against the Maven philosophy "one single >>> > > > artifact per >>> > > > > >> >> > > project" but right now splitting it up would be too >>> much effort >>> > > > for no >>> > > > > >> >> > > return. So I'm wondering if there's a way to use >>> flexmojos to >>> > > > compile >>> > > > > >> >> > > all of those apps. I already thought about using >>> profiles to >>> > > > compile >>> > > > > >> >> > > them separately but there must be an easier way... ? >>> > >>> > > > > >> >> > > Thanks in advance. >>> > >>> > > > > >> >> > > Cheers, >>> > > > > >> >> > > Jakob- Hide quoted text - >>> > >>> > > > > - Show quoted text - >>> >>> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
