Re: [Swftools-common] building a 'phony' playerglobal.swc

[Steve Linabery]

On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 08:29:58PM +0200, Matthias Kramm wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 12:56:07PM -0500, Steve Linabery <address@hidden> 
> wrote:
> > It seems to me that one could, for purposes of compiling against
> > playerglobal.swc, somehow generate "stubs" based on the information in
> > Adobe's .swc. In other words, create a source tree where all the
> > interface definitions resided, but there was no real implementation of
> > methods. I.e., "flash.foo.Bar.getFoo():Object" would just be
> > implemented to return null, and all methods returning void would just
> > be blank. Then one could compile that tree, use Adobe's tools to
> > generate a .swc from it, and then be able to compile the Flex
> > framework without depending on their closed-source binary.
> 
> That's pretty much what I did with as3compile. It's not actionscript
> source that's generated but c structs (see "builtin.c" in swftools' 
> lib/as3/), but the principle is the same I guess.
> The generator of this file is lib/as3/mklib.c (not sure right now
> whether that's part of the source archive- if not send me a private mail
> for git access).

Hey, that sounds really promising. I'll take a look. Thanks for that info.

> However, I haven't yet fully understood why you need this- do you want
> to package *both* the Flex compiler *and* your project?

Yes.

> If you only want
> to package your project, does it matter that the *compiler* is non-free
> if your source code is?

Yes. The packaging guidelines for Fedora spell this out in detail[1], but 
basically to get in Fedora you must be able to build everything from source, 
using no non-open, pre-compiled binaries.

We had assumed that since they released Open Flex SDK under MPL it would be 
possible to build their project from source code alone, but that's not the case.

Thanks again,
Steve

[1] 
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#No_inclusion_of_pre-built_binaries_or_libraries