Re: [flexcomponents] Component Packaging, Delivery, and Installation

Sat, 15 Jul 2006 12:45:59 -0700

I am not answering my own post ;-)

I just noticed what Ted said about ANT scripts, anything that can be done in FlexBuilder(if you are using it) should be. I really wanted to write this documenter as a FlexBuilder extension. Yeah right, to much on the plate for that.

If "this" documenter "was" released in "some" form, it wouldn't be in the near future. There are many things that would have to be done "before" any such "release" was doable. Notice all the quotes.

Another thing, it would also have to be investigated what could be done in Flex Builder's UI so nothing was duplicated that could be run in a more efficient language IE Java.

Peace, Mike

On 7/15/06, Michael Schmalle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's wrong with swc?

That is just one part of the package. Docs and examples do go in that, I far as i know? :)


> @Mike, so now you ARE giving away your source after all?!

Ha, that is not what I said and I will release things with source. Email, things can never get translated right. There is a frameowrk I am developing as an extension to Container. This I don't want to give the source with.

There are other components I have that extend Adobe components directly that I wouldn't have a problem including source. Yin and Yang man.

> use Mike's toolset!

>So far, we don't have a tool for MXML or AS3, but I'll bet that's coming soon. (eh, Mike?)

Yeah, You nkow howmany nights I have woken up with this nightmare. I spend 3 years developing this thing and now I want to make it open source for my fellow developers. Hm...

I have been having a hard time with this one, anyone that reads my blog knows I have a working AS#/mxml documenter that produces the exact same ASDoc that Adobe creates with the Final Flex 2 release.

This has been a long and arduous trip making it but it is wonderful and can be run on a server, it also has a FlexUI.

This allows Projects, different types of document types, tutorial mxml components, as2 components. Thie list could go on and on.

It can export xml, blah blah.

I'm sick of holding it in ;-) You can believe me when you see this;

http://www.flex2components.com/documentfx/docs/index-old.html

That is a frames version, yeah there is a NoteTag title, common this was done a couple weeks ago. I used Adobe docs as a template.

That is more of a raw as framework, maybe some words in it that need parental advisory. This documenter does styles, effects events, inheritDocs, copy docs all that fun stuff.

An idea I had is that icould create projecte skeletons, etc. Waiting for apollo to get it off the server teir.

Anyway I am rambling but, this if I could 'see the future' would be a great tool for component developers.

It's all polymorphic to, plugins etc could be loaded in. Team projects, etc. I'll take the plung and ask who is interested in helping me get this thing out to help us all out. Let me say this, the developers working on it have to be legitimate and it wouldn't be open source in that there is a public svn account. :)

Email offlist about it.

Peace, Mike




On 7/15/06, Ralf Bokelberg < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:

What's wrong with swc?
Cheers,
Ralf.



On 7/15/06, Ted Patrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
> >Cool... so... how do we do it?
>
> We just do it and move forward.
>
> The goal is to make sure 100% sure that any Flex developers can install
> components. We make the file system consistent and simple so that
> everyone understands a component ZIP file or file system. We do this as
> a group and define a standard for any component developer to aspire to.
>
> a. Reference Example Component FileSystem/ZIP.
> b. Page on Flex.org to denote standard.
> c. FlexComponents endorses it as a 'standards body'.
> d. KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid.
> e. Get an Adobe WhitePaper written.
> f. Get Adobe ASDocs released or use Mike's toolset!
> g. We automate compilation/packaging for component developers. Make a
> file system this way, edit an XML Build document, run this script, out
> pops a perfect ZIP with SOURCE, SWC, DOCS, LICENSE, INSTALLATION, ready
> to roll! Repeatable, consistent, simple. ( I can hear Anatole typing out
> an ANT script to do this right now... :) )
>
> The standard is a goal, something that developers should aspire to. If
> you want to write poorly formatted code without comments you are free to
> do so. I think eventually people will realize the quality of the
> components is based on these details. If docs are sharp, licensing,
> installation spot on perfect, it says that this developer took the time
> to do things right. It also makes a much stronger case for developers
> licensing components. Developers do not license crap, they license code
> that saves them time and money.
>
> We just need to take dead aim on a really great format to allow
> components to be distributed. If the format is easy for any developer to
> use, then we have succeeded.
>
> If we pruned things back to cover just a component distribution format
> then that would be perfect with me.
>
> IMHO,
>
> Ted :)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
Ralf Bokelberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Flex & Flash Consultant based in Cologne/Germany




--
What goes up, does come down.



--
What goes up, does come down. __._,_.___

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



__,_._,___

Reply via email to