On 24 Gen, 22:42, velo <[email protected]> wrote:
> If you could provide me a sample of what works on342 and doesnt at
> 350, I can try to figure out what is going on.
I'm trying with the example on svn at:
flexmojos/flexmojos-testing/flexmojos-test-harness/projects/concept/
copy-flex-resources
replacing the value of %{flexmojos.version} with 3.4.2 and 3.5.0 or
3.6-SNAPSHOT in both child modules pom.xml (BTW how does this special
property syntax work?)
if I issue "mvn clean install" from the copy-flex-resources dir
everything is ok, if I go into the war subdir and I launch it again I
get the file with the wrong name: ${project.artifactId}-$
{project.version}.swf
--m
>
> On 24 jan, 18:41, Marcello Teodori <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I don't know if it's related, but I experience the same problem with
> > flexmojos:copy-flex-resources on a multi-module project, but only when
> > I build just the war module within its directory, not when I build
> > everything from the root.
> > My swf dependency instead of being copied with its correct
> > interpolated name appears as c. Other hints,
> > the problem exists in 3.5.0 and current 3.6-SNAPSHOT trunk , but not
> > in 3.4.2 - unfortunately by diffying the CopyMojo.java between 3.4.2
> > and 3.5.0 I couldn't spot anything that could create the problem.
>
> > --m
>
> > On 2 Dic 2009, 17:24, velo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Ow, so you are saying that ${swf} is being interpolated to $
> > > {artifactId}-${version} instead of my-project-1.0-SNAPSHOT? is that
> > > it? If that so I would blame maven, but need to do a code review if
> > > that is the case.
>
> > > VELO
>
> > > On Dec 2, 1:56 pm, Darren <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Wow, my head is spinning!
>
> > > > Hi Velo, so I have a 5 modules in a LCDS project:
>
> > > > - config
> > > > - jar
> > > > - swc <- depends on jar
> > > > - swf <- depends on config, swc
> > > > - war <- depends on config, jar, swf
>
> > > > I have finally wired all this up correctly; I've been banging my head
> > > > for the longest time with the wrapper mojo in the war project... well
> > > > actually for about a day.
>
> > > > The only thing left is the correct substitution of the ${swf}
> > > > parameter/variable.
>
> > > > I now understand what JBoss means; you can use whatever finalName you
> > > > want in the swf project, but anything other than artifactId-version
> > > > will obviously not match what's installed into the local/remote
> > > > repository for that swf project. After hard-coding this finalName, if
> > > > the version of the project is incremented automatically i.e. via the
> > > > maven-release-plugin, the wrapper mojo will point to the old SWF while
> > > > the newer (version) SWF will be bundled in the war... in other words,
> > > > it'll break.
>
> > > > I've spent the last couple hours investigating, looking at
> > > > HtmlWrapperMojo.java (3.4.2) & Co and it looks like no interpolation
> > > > is being down; that is, no properties are being replaced whatsoever
> > > > through Maven provided mechanisms. The substitutions we see are
> > > > performed 'manually', if you like, and do not recurse (replace
> > > > properties in properties in properties). From what I can gather,
> > > > ModelInterpolator implementations are responsible for doing this.
>
> > > > My brain fried at this point.
>
> > > > So to answer you question, I expect the ${swf} to be interpolated to
> > > > something that does not contain property markers if those properties
> > > > can be resolved in the swf's pom.
>
> > > > I think for now I'll have to maintain the finalName of my swf project.
>
> > > > I can't commit to fixing this I'm working on borrowed time as it is.
>
> > > > Cheers
>
> > > > On 2 Dec, 14:39, velo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Guys, what are you talking about?
>
> > > > > What do you expect as ${swf}?
> > > > > v_e_l_o.swf? =D
>
> > > > > VELO
>
> > > > > On Dec 2, 10:03 am, Darren <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I'm not in the habit of setting finalName so it's a little annoying
> > > > > > that I now have to.
>
> > > > > > Is this a bug? I'd sooner fix the bug than have to do this.
>
> > > > > > I presume this finalName is set in the swf project being wrapped?
>
> > > > > > Cheers
>
> > > > > > On 19 Nov, 16:20, Jboss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > For people that might have the same issue:
>
> > > > > > > Adding a finalName does work, as long as it does not contain any
> > > > > > > properties.
> > > > > > > In order to let it work out of the box with the
> > > > > > > copy-flex-resources
> > > > > > > goal, the finalName must be equal to ${project.artifactId}-$
> > > > > > > {project.version} but without the use of properties.
>
> > > > > > > On 19 nov, 16:33, Jboss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > nm my last post.
> > > > > > > > I see what you mean. it takes the finalName which is by default
> > > > > > > > resolved to ${project.artifactId}-${project.version}.
>
> > > > > > > > In my case however ${project.artifactId} and ${project.version}
> > > > > > > > seem
> > > > > > > > not to be resolved themselves.
>
> > > > > > > > On 19 nov, 16:30, Jboss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Adding a finalName on the swf pom doesnt change anything for
> > > > > > > > > me. Also
> > > > > > > > > the 102 sample does not have a finalName declared.
>
> > > > > > > > > On 19 nov, 16:19, Marvin Froeder <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > It should be using ${project.build.finalName}
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Jboss
> > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm trying to use the flexmojos:wrappergoal for creating
> > > > > > > > > > > awrapperon
> > > > > > > > > > > awar.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > In my configuration I'm using the <wrapperArtifact>. All
> > > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > > placeholders are correctly being replaced eg. ${title},
> > > > > > > > > > > ${application}
> > > > > > > > > > > and so on.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Only the ${swf} is being replaced by
> > > > > > > > > > > ${project.artifactId}-$
> > > > > > > > > > > {project.version}
>
> > > > > > > > > > > I copied my templates into the
> > > > > > > > > > > test-harness/**/flex-mojos-102 sample,
> > > > > > > > > > > there it works flawlessly. I compared all the poms, and
> > > > > > > > > > > cannot find
> > > > > > > > > > > any difference that might explain this behaviour.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Could you please tell me how the ${swf} is being resolved?
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > Tom
>
> > > > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > > > 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]<flex-mojos%2bunsubscr...@googlegrou
> > > > > > > > > > > ps.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/flex-mojos?hl=en?hl=en
>
> > > > > > > > > > >http://blog.flex-mojos.info/
--
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/
