You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> on 2012/07/23 17:15:22 UTC
Compiling SDK for other locales and versions of the Flash Player
Hi,
I've just checked in changes to the build scrips that will:
1. Enable you to compile the SDK for locales other than eu_US. All of the locales supported in 4.6 are supported with the addition of en_AU (Australian), en_GB (British) and en_CA (Canadian). el_GR (Greek) is just waiting on a few files. To change the locale you wish to compile the SDK for just change the value of locale (currently line 29 and set to "en_US") in build.properties.
2. Allow you to compile the SDK for any version of the Flash Player from 10.2 to 11.4. Extensive testing has not been carried out on versions other than 11.1 (waiting on Mustella tests to be donated) but from my own informal testing it runs quicker on 11.2 and 11.3 and I've not seen any issues. Mobile application may have performance or other issues on earlier versions of the Flash Player before 11.1.
Feedback on the changes is welcome.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Compiling SDK for other locales and versions of the Flash Player
Posted by OmPrakash Muppirala <om...@gmail.com>.
>Mobile application may have performance or other issues on earlier
versions of the Flash Player before 11.1.
Mobile applications on Flash Player? Did you mean the AIR runtime?
Thanks,
Om
Re: Compiling SDK for other locales and versions of the Flash Player
Posted by Carol Frampton <cf...@adobe.com>.
On 7/23/12 7 :44PM, "Justin Mclean" <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> Yes, RAT would have caught it.
>Well it must of slipped through somehow. Fixed now.
Just reran ant on the kit and it said flex-config.xml has an Apache
license so I looked at the header again, but more closely. Te Apache
text is there. It is just the first line that shouldn't really be there.
Carol
<!--
Copyright 2011 Adobe Systems, Inc.
Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
limitations under the License.
-->
>
>Thanks,
>Justin
Re: Compiling SDK for other locales and versions of the Flash Player
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> Yes, RAT would have caught it.
Well it must of slipped through somehow. Fixed now.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Compiling SDK for other locales and versions of the Flash Player
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
Yes, RAT would have caught it.
On 7/23/12 3:53 PM, "Justin Mclean" <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> Also flex-template.config.xml has an Adobe copyright header which needs to
>> be switched to an Apache header.
>
> That also in the existing flex-config.xml (ops!) I'll fix. Does RAT check
> licences in xml files?
>
> Justin
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: Compiling SDK for other locales and versions of the Flash Player
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> Also flex-template.config.xml has an Adobe copyright header which needs to
> be switched to an Apache header.
That also in the existing flex-config.xml (ops!) I'll fix. Does RAT check licences in xml files?
Justin
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Nicholas Kwiatkowski <ni...@spoon.as>.
I like this better. I hate having the idea of an 'unstable' version
number. If it is unstable, it shouldn't be in the trunk ;)
-Nick
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> On Jul 23, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Rick Winscot wrote:
>
> > Some do... some don't.
> >
> > http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/DIRxPMGT/version-numbering-scheme.html
> >
> > I was just thinking that it would be nice to have some kind of pattern
> (for a while) to identify stable releases.
>
> Unstable versions could follow a pattern like.
>
> 5.0Alpha1, 5.0Beta1, 5.0Beta2
>
> With stable being 5.0
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > R
> >
> >
> > On Monday, July 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Jonathan Campos wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Rick Winscot <rick.winscot@gmail.com(mailto:
> rick.winscot@gmail.com)>wrote:
> >>
> >>> Anyone thinking about adopting an even / odd numbering system to denote
> >>> stable / development releases?
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Is that status quo for other apache projects?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jonathan Campos
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Jul 23, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Rick Winscot wrote:
> Some do... some don't.
>
> http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/DIRxPMGT/version-numbering-scheme.html
>
> I was just thinking that it would be nice to have some kind of pattern (for a while) to identify stable releases.
Unstable versions could follow a pattern like.
5.0Alpha1, 5.0Beta1, 5.0Beta2
With stable being 5.0
Just a thought.
Regards,
Dave
>
> R
>
>
> On Monday, July 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Jonathan Campos wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Rick Winscot <rick.winscot@gmail.com (mailto:rick.winscot@gmail.com)>wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone thinking about adopting an even / odd numbering system to denote
>>> stable / development releases?
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Is that status quo for other apache projects?
>>
>> --
>> Jonathan Campos
>>
>>
>
>
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> I was just thinking that it would be nice to have some kind of pattern (for a while) to identify stable releases.
How about ones we release vs what's in the trunk? :-) This style version numbering is useful if you have different branches of the SDK in which separate work is going on not sure we are at that stage yet.
IMO as (from this point) it should be fairly easy to make a release and the version number are likely to go up my smaller steps than they did in the past. Release often I say. Perhaps for instance the different ability to compile for different locales and different Flash Player versions is enough of a change for a 4.8.1 release?
Thanks,
Justin
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Rick Winscot <ri...@gmail.com>.
Some do... some don't.
http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html
https://cwiki.apache.org/DIRxPMGT/version-numbering-scheme.html
I was just thinking that it would be nice to have some kind of pattern (for a while) to identify stable releases.
R
On Monday, July 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Jonathan Campos wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Rick Winscot <rick.winscot@gmail.com (mailto:rick.winscot@gmail.com)>wrote:
>
> > Anyone thinking about adopting an even / odd numbering system to denote
> > stable / development releases?
> >
>
>
>
> Is that status quo for other apache projects?
>
> --
> Jonathan Campos
>
>
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Rick Winscot <ri...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Anyone thinking about adopting an even / odd numbering system to denote
> stable / development releases?
Is that status quo for other apache projects?
--
Jonathan Campos
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Rick Winscot <ri...@gmail.com>.
Anyone thinking about adopting an even / odd numbering system to denote stable / development releases?
R
On Monday, July 23, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Jonathan Campos wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski <nicholas@spoon.as (mailto:nicholas@spoon.as)>wrote:
>
> > The voice inside me (quiet you!) says that bug fixes to the current release
> > would be 4.8.1 (we screwed up the ANT script, or something along those
> > lines), bug fixes to the SDK / Compiler would be 4.9, and new features
> > would be 5.0.
> >
> > In my mind, we would setup branches for all three.
>
> My thoughts:
>
> 4.8.x - bug fixes and minor changes
> 4.9.0 - new functionality and components. still 100% backwards compatible
> with 4.x branch
> 5.0 - major changes. possible framework changes and backwards compatibility
> changes.
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Campos
>
>
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski <ni...@spoon.as>wrote:
> The voice inside me (quiet you!) says that bug fixes to the current release
> would be 4.8.1 (we screwed up the ANT script, or something along those
> lines), bug fixes to the SDK / Compiler would be 4.9, and new features
> would be 5.0.
>
> In my mind, we would setup branches for all three.
>
My thoughts:
4.8.x - bug fixes and minor changes
4.9.0 - new functionality and components. still 100% backwards compatible
with 4.x branch
5.0 - major changes. possible framework changes and backwards compatibility
changes.
--
Jonathan Campos
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Shannon Hicks <sh...@iotashan.com>.
+1
On Jul 23, 2012, at 3:58 PM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski <ni...@spoon.as> wrote:
> The voice inside me (quiet you!) says that bug fixes to the current release
> would be 4.8.1 (we screwed up the ANT script, or something along those
> lines), bug fixes to the SDK / Compiler would be 4.9, and new features
> would be 5.0.
>
> In my mind, we would setup branches for all three.
>
> -Nick
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Greg Reddin <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Carol Frampton <cf...@adobe.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Any predictions what will be the next released version? I'd like to bump
>>> the version numbers before I go off and do some non-build work. If we
>>> guess wrong we go always go back and change them again.
>>
>> Seems like it would be hard to know till we're ready to release.
>>
>> If we found a huge bug and needed to cut a release very soon it would
>> likely be 4.8.1. But if we do a bunch of development and change
>> everything, then cut a release, it would be 4.9 or 5.0?
>>
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Nicholas Kwiatkowski <ni...@spoon.as>.
The voice inside me (quiet you!) says that bug fixes to the current release
would be 4.8.1 (we screwed up the ANT script, or something along those
lines), bug fixes to the SDK / Compiler would be 4.9, and new features
would be 5.0.
In my mind, we would setup branches for all three.
-Nick
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Greg Reddin <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Carol Frampton <cf...@adobe.com>
> wrote:
> > Any predictions what will be the next released version? I'd like to bump
> > the version numbers before I go off and do some non-build work. If we
> > guess wrong we go always go back and change them again.
>
> Seems like it would be hard to know till we're ready to release.
>
> If we found a huge bug and needed to cut a release very soon it would
> likely be 4.8.1. But if we do a bunch of development and change
> everything, then cut a release, it would be 4.9 or 5.0?
>
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Greg Reddin <gr...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Carol Frampton <cf...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Any predictions what will be the next released version? I'd like to bump
> the version numbers before I go off and do some non-build work. If we
> guess wrong we go always go back and change them again.
Seems like it would be hard to know till we're ready to release.
If we found a huge bug and needed to cut a release very soon it would
likely be 4.8.1. But if we do a bunch of development and change
everything, then cut a release, it would be 4.9 or 5.0?
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Om <bi...@gmail.com>.
I am guessing we will be making a 4.8.1 release to fix issues that come up
with the parity release.
Thanks,
Om
On Jul 23, 2012 1:45 PM, "Carol Frampton" <cf...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Any predictions what will be the next released version? I'd like to bump
> the version numbers before I go off and do some non-build work. If we
> guess wrong we go always go back and change them again.
>
> Carol
>
>
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Jonathan Campos <jo...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
> I still like the idea of having a "working" or "unstable" branch that most
> of us work in and only good stuff in there gets promoted to trunk. Brand
> new stuff you can put in your whiteboard until it starts to feel ok.
>
Agreed Alex on the experimental branches. The odd/even versioning just is
confusing. We would have to explain over and over again which one to use,
not use, is experimental, or not.
--
Jonathan Campos
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 7/24/12 11:46 AM, "Omar Gonzalez" <om...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I generally agree with most of the comments.
>
> The only thing I think doesn't sounds like a good idea is the odd/even to
> denote stable/unstable releases. I'd prefer the 5.0.alpha type of
> versioning so it is absolutely obvious to devs that the branch is not
> production ready as opposed to having to know that there is a difference
> between odd and even numbers.
I think there is version checking code that expects a number instead of a
word, but we can probably find and fix those, I suppose.
I still like the idea of having a "working" or "unstable" branch that most
of us work in and only good stuff in there gets promoted to trunk. Brand
new stuff you can put in your whiteboard until it starts to feel ok.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Omar Gonzalez <om...@gmail.com>.
I generally agree with most of the comments.
The only thing I think doesn't sounds like a good idea is the odd/even to
denote stable/unstable releases. I'd prefer the 5.0.alpha type of
versioning so it is absolutely obvious to devs that the branch is not
production ready as opposed to having to know that there is a difference
between odd and even numbers.
-omar
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Igor Costa <ig...@gmail.com>.
Carol
I must agree on 4.8.1 to fix bugs on the current release and quite fit the
way Apache does for other projects.
When we have new components going on under 4.8.x We will more confident to
release 4.9
Best Regards
----------------------------
Igor Costa
www.igorcosta.com
www.igorcosta.org
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Carol Frampton <cf...@adobe.com> wrote:
> I thought about this a bit more last night after I sent the mail.
>
> My vote would be to set up trunk to be 4.8.1 but I think we could use at
> least one, for flex.next which could become either 4.9 or 5.0. Or rather
> than a branch for each version, have trunk as the stable branch and one or
> more branches with various degrees of stability. I think I remember Roy
> saying httpd did it this way. When a feature became "ready" it is merged
> to trunk.
>
> As someone tweeted last night, I branched trunk to
> whiteboard/cframpton/adobe.next yesterday which will be populated with the
> Adobe flex5 work as soon as it gets legal clearance. Some of the incoming
> code is completely done, some completely done and tested, and some in
> various states of doneness. There are also just general bug fixes. Once
> we've picked this apart and decide what we want and what we don't want it
> would be good to have a branch to put the "keep" code in since I don't
> think much of it, other than bug fixes, belongs in trunk.
>
> Just fyi, currently changing versions requires a few too many hand-edits
> of various files. Minimally I want to do it one more time and document all
> the places, but automating it would be even better.
>
> Carol
>
>
> On 7/23/12 4 :44PM, "Carol Frampton" <cf...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> >Any predictions what will be the next released version? I'd like to bump
> >the version numbers before I go off and do some non-build work. If we
> >guess wrong we go always go back and change them again.
> >
> >Carol
> >
>
>
Re: next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Carol Frampton <cf...@adobe.com>.
I thought about this a bit more last night after I sent the mail.
My vote would be to set up trunk to be 4.8.1 but I think we could use at
least one, for flex.next which could become either 4.9 or 5.0. Or rather
than a branch for each version, have trunk as the stable branch and one or
more branches with various degrees of stability. I think I remember Roy
saying httpd did it this way. When a feature became "ready" it is merged
to trunk.
As someone tweeted last night, I branched trunk to
whiteboard/cframpton/adobe.next yesterday which will be populated with the
Adobe flex5 work as soon as it gets legal clearance. Some of the incoming
code is completely done, some completely done and tested, and some in
various states of doneness. There are also just general bug fixes. Once
we've picked this apart and decide what we want and what we don't want it
would be good to have a branch to put the "keep" code in since I don't
think much of it, other than bug fixes, belongs in trunk.
Just fyi, currently changing versions requires a few too many hand-edits
of various files. Minimally I want to do it one more time and document all
the places, but automating it would be even better.
Carol
On 7/23/12 4 :44PM, "Carol Frampton" <cf...@adobe.com> wrote:
>Any predictions what will be the next released version? I'd like to bump
>the version numbers before I go off and do some non-build work. If we
>guess wrong we go always go back and change them again.
>
>Carol
>
next release 4.9 or 4.8.1?
Posted by Carol Frampton <cf...@adobe.com>.
Any predictions what will be the next released version? I'd like to bump
the version numbers before I go off and do some non-build work. If we
guess wrong we go always go back and change them again.
Carol
Re: Compiling SDK for other locales and versions of the Flash Player
Posted by Carol Frampton <cf...@adobe.com>.
On 7/23/12 11 :15AM, "Justin Mclean" <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I've just checked in changes to the build scrips that will:
>
>1. Enable you to compile the SDK for locales other than eu_US. All of the
>locales supported in 4.6 are supported with the addition of en_AU
>(Australian), en_GB (British) and en_CA (Canadian). el_GR (Greek) is just
>waiting on a few files. To change the locale you wish to compile the SDK
>for just change the value of locale (currently line 29 and set to
>"en_US") in build.properties.
>
>2. Allow you to compile the SDK for any version of the Flash Player from
>10.2 to 11.4. Extensive testing has not been carried out on versions
>other than 11.1 (waiting on Mustella tests to be donated) but from my own
>informal testing it runs quicker on 11.2 and 11.3 and I've not seen any
>issues. Mobile application may have performance or other issues on
>earlier versions of the Flash Player before 11.1.
>
>Feedback on the changes is welcome.
Also flex-template.config.xml has an Adobe copyright header which needs to
be switched to an Apache header.
Carol
Re: Compiling SDK for other locales and versions of the Flash Player
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> * The change spans 6 commits. Is there some reason you didn't combine
> them since all the changes were related to one "feature"?
There were 2 major features but several sets of changes and I gave each set a different comment. The changes were checkin in an order so that they didn't break the build at any point.
> * I would have preferred that you renamed flex-config.xml to
> flex-config-template.xml so I could have easily seen what you changed and
> the version history was preserved.
I'll see. if I can fix that up.
> * flex-config now has @locale@ and {locale}. I think your change has made
> {locale} obsolete since @locale@ could be used instead.
I change to use @locale@.
> * build_framework.xml doesn't really need the property def for locale
> since it is set in build.properties.
I'll remove it.
> * I'm a bit concerned that the format of <name> in flex-sdk-description.xml changed.
This was discussed ages ago in the list and committed into the patches branch. The basic issue is that if you have 2 SDK one compiler for en_AU and en_US you need to be able to distinguish them in the UI having 2 SDK with the same name is confusing. Same if you compile for 2 versions of the SDK (although the mimimum Flashs Player version does kick in).
It might be possible to add extra nodes but the existing and future IDEs would need to change to take that into account.
I'm open to any other suggestions to how to distinguish 2 SDKs compiled for different locales.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: Compiling SDK for other locales and versions of the Flash Player
Posted by Carol Frampton <cf...@adobe.com>.
On 7/23/12 11 :15AM, "Justin Mclean" <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I've just checked in changes to the build scrips that will:
>
>1. Enable you to compile the SDK for locales other than eu_US. All of the
>locales supported in 4.6 are supported with the addition of en_AU
>(Australian), en_GB (British) and en_CA (Canadian). el_GR (Greek) is just
>waiting on a few files. To change the locale you wish to compile the SDK
>for just change the value of locale (currently line 29 and set to
>"en_US") in build.properties.
>
>2. Allow you to compile the SDK for any version of the Flash Player from
>10.2 to 11.4. Extensive testing has not been carried out on versions
>other than 11.1 (waiting on Mustella tests to be donated) but from my own
>informal testing it runs quicker on 11.2 and 11.3 and I've not seen any
>issues. Mobile application may have performance or other issues on
>earlier versions of the Flash Player before 11.1.
>
>Feedback on the changes is welcome.
Hi Justin,
I just took a look at the submits.
* The change spans 6 commits. Is there some reason you didn't combine
them since all the changes were related to one "feature"?
* I would have preferred that you renamed flex-config.xml to
flex-config-template.xml so I could have easily seen what you changed and
the version history was preserved.
* flex-config now has @locale@ and {locale}. I think your change has made
{locale} obsolete since @locale@ could be used instead. Then the compiler
wouldn't have do the scan and make the substitution for each file compiled.
* build_framework.xml doesn't really need the property def for locale
since it is set in build.properties. In fact, it gives the false
impression that setting it will change the locale which isn't the case
anymore.
* I'm a bit concerned that the format of <name> in
flex-sdk-description.xml changed. I know FlashBuilder looks at that.
I'll have to test the current and preview release for the next version.
* Thanks for fixing {$locale}.
Carol