If I recall correctly, the problem I had in the distant past was when updating from FB2 to a beta of FB3. The warnings I referred to were just from various blogs I don't have handy. Anyway, despite Blake's response below, I feel more confident checking the templates in, as I believe FB3 is more polite about warning before overwriting.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 9:59 AM, Blake Barrett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The HTML-template folder being over-written is a frequent problem we have. > We've had to just run our command-line build that overwrites whenever flex > builder overwrites it. Not a real solution, but it works in a pinch. > > Blake > > ________________________________ > From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Tracy Spratt > Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 10:05 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [flexcoders] html-template under source control > > > > > > > > > Not that I know of. I do that. What "dire warnings"? And if it is likely > to get overwritten (I have never seen FB do that), all the more reason to > protect it. > > > > What is your concern? > > > > Tracy > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Richard Rodseth > Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:39 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [flexcoders] html-template under source control > > > > > > > > > In the past I avoided putting html-template in Subversion, because of > various dire warnings as well as the fact that earlier versions of > Flexbuilder had a tendency to overwrite it without warning. But now I > would like myself and other develops to have the FlashVars available > when running within Flexbuilder. Given that I won't be checking in the > bin folder, and can also turn off the "copy non-embedded resources" > option, is there any reason not to put html-template under version > control? > > Thanks. > > > >
