AW: [Discuss] What to do with SWF target now that Adobe removed Flash Player in 2021 (Re: How to build from now on?)

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi Carlos,

as this is only one artifact, I would probably use something completely 
different, which wouldn’t make the use of the mavenizer required at all for 
getting the playerglobal.

We probably still need it for the AIR stuff, but I think that’s till available, 
isn
t it?

Chris

Von: Carlos Rovira 
Gesendet: Montag, 4. Januar 2021 09:33
An: Apache Royale Development ; Christofer Dutz 

Betreff: Re: [Discuss] What to do with SWF target now that Adobe removed Flash 
Player in 2021 (Re: How to build from now on?)

Ok,

@Christofer Dutz can you update and release 
mavenizer to use

https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/updaters/32/playerglobal32_0.swc

instead:

https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/installers/archive/playerglobal/playerglobal20_0.swc

I think that would solve the issue to build from a clean computer right?

anyway i wonder if this url will be valid for long


El dom, 3 ene 2021 a las 23:44, Harbs 
(mailto:harbs.li...@gmail.com>>) escribió:
Why not just point to the current playerglobal?
https://fpdownload.macromedia.com/get/flashplayer/updaters/32/playerglobal32_0.swc


> On Jan 4, 2021, at 12:30 AM, Carlos Rovira 
> mailto:carlosrov...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> Hi, I think we are in real problems now.
> If a new user comes and try to build he can't. Since he can download the
> playerglobal.swc.
> So for me that's a real problems today.
>
> El dom, 3 ene 2021 a las 20:07, Harbs 
> (mailto:harbs.li...@gmail.com>>) escribió:
>
>> Let’s wait and see whether we are dealing with real issues or not. If it’s
>> an issue we can debate solutions.
>>
>> I’m happy to ask my Adobe contacts what the plan is.
>>
>>> On Jan 3, 2021, at 8:52 PM, Carlos Rovira 
>>> mailto:carlosrov...@apache.org>>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Harbs,
>>>
>>> the problem here's that I think we are on Apache, and using a piece of
>>> software that is under a clear license use will be against the foundation
>>> rules. So although you or I can host the files, that's not seem to me
>> like
>>> a solution to the real problem.
>>>
>>> I'm for go step by step and first try to talk with Adobe representatives
>> to
>>> get the permission for Apache to host the player files only for our flex
>>> and royale use cases. I think we could continue discussion after we know
>>> the solution to this request
>>>
>>> Can you, Alex or others do this request? or if you want I can do it, but
>>> need someone to provide me the contact at adobe.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> El dom, 3 ene 2021 a las 15:59, Harbs 
>>> (mailto:harbs.li...@gmail.com>>)
>> escribió:
>>>
 There’s no license agreement when downloading playerglobal or the
>> content
 debugger.

 I’m willing to take the risk to personally host these files if
>> necessary.

> On Jan 3, 2021, at 4:47 PM, Christofer Dutz 
> mailto:christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
>>>
 wrote:
>
> And I doubt we would be allowed to simply upload Adobe stuff to any
 other server wirhout explicit conset from them. The license agreement
>> you
 agreed to when downloading explicitly forbids that (at least it did,
>> wenn
 we were working on the Flex Mavenizer and I doubt things changed)


>>>
>>> --
>>> Carlos Rovira
>>> Apache Member & Apache Royale PMC
>>> *Apache Software Foundation*
>>> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>>
>>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> Apache Member & Apache Royale PMC
> *Apache Software Foundation*
> http://about.me/carlosrovira


--
Carlos Rovira
Apache Member & Apache Royale PMC
Apache Software Foundation
http://about.me/carlosrovira

AW: [Discuss] What to do with SWF target now that Adobe removed Flash Player in 2021 (Re: How to build from now on?)

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi Harbs,

but we can compile SWCs without SWF support, or are you referring to you/your 
company with "we"? Building all repos without the "option-with-swf" option does 
work.

And I doubt we would be allowed to simply upload Adobe stuff to any other 
server wirhout explicit conset from them. The license agreement you agreed to 
when downloading explicitly forbids that (at least it did, wenn we were working 
on the Flex Mavenizer and I doubt things changed)

Chris

-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: Harbs  
Gesendet: Sonntag, 3. Januar 2021 15:31
An: Apache Royale Development 
Betreff: Re: [Discuss] What to do with SWF target now that Adobe removed Flash 
Player in 2021 (Re: How to build from now on?)

We can’t make swf optional until we can compile SWCs without SWF support.

We don’t hyet know what will be available from Adobe’s website.

If the necessary pieces will no longer be available from Adobe, we can put it 
on some other server.

A longer-term strategy of making SWF optional is something we can consider, but 
we are a long way from there currently, so the discussion is premature IMO.

My $0.02,
Harbs

> On Jan 3, 2021, at 1:01 PM, Carlos Rovira  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Chris,
> 
> thanks for taking a look and report this. I think this is a big issue 
> that we all should discuss. So changing the topic to [Discuss].
> A clear action is needed from the PMC here.
> 
> For me the options are:
> 
> 1.- Make SWF something optional in all the builds and releases, but 
> not required. So SWF target can become obsolete and not maintained or 
> seen as an issue for releasing. People can add manually the Flash 
> Player in its repo if they have it and continue building and ensure 
> things continue working, but the JS will be the main and unique 
> requested target until we have another like WASM in the future (if 
> that happen on day). The main problem will be that Apache Royale will 
> lose eventually the double target we have right now as something we 
> know is working, at least in an official way.
> 
> 2.- As Chris said, see if there's some way to make Adobe provide a 
> special use case for the playerglobal.swc and let us use it. I think 
> that not should be a problem since that bits are not really useful or 
> harmful without the Flash Player to run things on browsers. But I 
> figure the Adobe response will be just a simple "NO". But we can try 
> before falling back to option 1. For this to happen I think someone 
> like Alex Harui that is inside Adobe can move the threads internally 
> or just let to us and give some Adobe contact to ask for this 
> permission. I think the Apache Flex donation to Apache seems to me 
> broken without this, since the project is now broken, and Apache Royale is in 
> the same boat.
> 
> More options? Thoughts?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Carlos
> 
> 
> El dom, 3 ene 2021 a las 11:21, Christofer Dutz 
> ()
> escribió:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> in December I got my new Laptop and set it up. I forgot to get the 
>> Flash Debug player.
>> Now I did manage to download the 32 bit version of the Content 
>> Debuger, but already some of the downloads on the download page:
>> Adobe Flash Player - Debug Downloads< 
>> https://www.adobe.com/support/flashplayer/debug_downloads.html>
>> Result in 404s
>> 
>> Will the 32bit content debugger stay available? If not we will be 
>> cutting off new contributors. Cause building with the "with-flash" 
>> profile will not be possible.
>> 
>> So I cloned Royale on my new machine and gave it a spin. 
>> Unfortunately I will not be able to build all parts from now on as I 
>> no longer have access to the playerglobal.
>> 
>> [INFO] Couldn't find artifact:
>> com.adobe.flash.framework:20.0:playerglobal:pom
>> [INFO] ===
>> [INFO]  - Installing Adobe Flash SDK 20.0
>> SLF4J: Class path contains multiple SLF4J bindings.
>> SLF4J: Found binding in
>> [jar:file:/C:/Users/cdutz/.m2/repository/org/apache/flex/utilities/co
>> nverter/flex-sdk-converter-maven-extension/1.0.0/flex-sdk-converter-m
>> aven-extension-1.0.0.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
>> SLF4J: Found binding in
>> [jar:file:/C:/Users/cdutz/.m2/repository/org/slf4j/slf4j-simple/1.7.2
>> 1/slf4j-simple-1.7.21.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
>> SLF4J: Found binding in
>> [jar:file:/C:/Users/cdutz/.m2/repository/ch/qos/logback/logback-class
>> ic/1.1.7/logback-classic-1.1.7.jar!/org/slf4j/impl/StaticLoggerBinder
>> .class]
>> SLF4J: Found binding in
>> [jar:file:/C:/Program%20Files/JetBrains/IntelliJ%20IDEA%202020.3/plug
>> ins/maven/lib/maven3/lib/maven-slf4j-provider-3.6.3.jar!/org/slf4j/im
>> pl/StaticLoggerBinder.class]
>> SLF4J: See http://www.slf4j.org/codes.html#multiple_bindings for an 
>> explanation.
>> SLF4J: Actual binding is of type [org.slf4j.impl.SimpleLoggerFactory]
>> Your System-Id: ddcb1466
>> The Adobe SDK license agreement applies to the Adobe Flash Player 
>> playerglobal.swc. Do you want to