cristallium commented on issue #519: SDK 0.9.6 <js:DataGridPercentageView/> 
bead work only on header DataGrid, not on cells
URL: https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/issues/519#issuecomment-544488677
 
 
   Hi Carlos, 
   
   Thanks for your patience, I'm a totaly newbie on SDK building, so a lot
   of questions, if you could clarify some, it would be great. 
   
   >I think SOF is maybe more suited for end users that need to know some topic 
that is always the same for all 
   
   I understand. Perhaps I could open a newtopic on issues on github ?
   that's because this discuss is about SDK building. Following is what I
   would to ask : 
   
   As a newbie on SDK building,  I ask myself several questions that
   https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/wiki/Build-Apache-Royale-with-Maven
   doesn't answer. I lack of a global view of process 
   
   1) I believe it's easier to download and compile fixed official version
   (0.9.6 from
   
https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.6/binaries/apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js.zip
   ) than trunk branch from git because I'm sure to be able to compile SDK
   without any errors. I'm right ? 
   
   2) I believe I can (re)compile only SDK without _royale-compiler_ and
   _royale-typedefs_ (because they are already in_
   apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js\royale-asjs\js\bin_ folder) and output of SDK
   re-compile would be in _apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js\royale-asjs\js\libs_.
   Right ? (or apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js\royale-asjs\target ?) 
   
   3) (if right on 2) => On
   https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/wiki/Build-Apache-Royale-with-Maven
   can I skip step 2,3,4 ? And do I need _Flash Player projector content
   debugger _if I want js only SDK_ ?_ 
   
   4) To do step 2 I go directly in
   _apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js\royale-asjs_ folder and run_ mvn -s
   settings-template.xml clean install -Pgenerate-swcs-for-swf_ 
   
   5) I saw some lines showing "0.9.7" when doing 4) . So I'm not rebuild
   0.9.6 doing 4) ? 
   
   6) At the end of process of 4) I have issue 548 Unknown Licenses like   
   
     examples/royale/TourDeJewel/bin/js-debug/AdvancedListPlayGround.js
     examples/royale/TourDeJewel/bin/js-debug/AdvancedListPlayGround.js.map
     examples/royale/TourDeJewel/bin/js-debug/AlertPlayGround.js 
   
   ....So, I think I'm totaly wrong on my process to rebuild only SDK 0.9.6
   from
   
https://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.6/binaries/apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js.zip
   ? 
   
   Le 21.10.2019 13:33, Carlos Rovira a écrit :
   
   > Hi Fred, I think SOF is maybe more suited for end users that need to know 
some topic that is always the same for all. In this case is more about to know 
what is failing in your current config that could be something just for your 
case, and maybe less important as a "general rule". 
   > 
   > The problem:
   > 
   > Too many files with unapproved licence : 548 see RAT report
   > 
   > is because we have setup in Maven the RAT maven plugin that checks all 
files has the Apache license header. You can see the RAT report generate in 
target folder to see what files does not have it. Usually this files are new 
files you created. 
   > 
   > HTH 
   > 
   > Carlos 
   > 
   > --
   > You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
   > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub [1], or unsubscribe [2].
   
    
   
   Links:
   ------
   [1]
   
https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/issues/519?email_source=notifications&amp;email_token=ABUIW2IFDV4F4VI5OX3CDBTQPWHR5A5CNFSM4JB7ZUJ2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEB2AGKY#issuecomment-544473899
   [2]
   
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABUIW2NAQPFT4MI2LYDU5DDQPWHR5ANCNFSM4JB7ZUJQ

----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


With regards,
Apache Git Services

Reply via email to