Going to the Hello World stage - yes we definitely shorten this path and whoever I meet he is able to do such, but they are getting lost moving just a bit forward.
This is mostly due to two things: 1) Users straightforward thinking that Royale is exactly same as Flex, but it is not - we have similarities 2) They cannot find straightforward examples nor documentation to get enough knowledge I don't want to dive deeper, but apart of what I have said above we are pretty good. Thanks, Piotr pt., 24 maj 2019 o 12:34 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> napisał(a): > Ok Piotr, > so talking now only about "SDK user" case you think new users coming like > Adrian or others are currently ok and are successful using (I suppose) the > latest nightly build? If that's true is a success for Royale without doubt. > > thanks > > El vie., 24 may. 2019 a las 10:31, Piotr Zarzycki (< > [email protected]>) escribió: > > > Hi Carlos, > > > > Good example of user was Adrian who have started look into the Royale. He > > wasn't even thinking about going into the frameworks code, so his first > > attempt was - how to use it and build multiplatform application? Not how > to > > build framework and fix it? - cause if you coming to technology and have > to > > fix it in the first place to be able to work with - what kind of > impression > > do you have about it ? > > > > I believe only fraction of users whether they will be ActionScript or non > > AS developers would go deeper into framework - And even if they are I > > expect those will be people who definitely won't be afraid made some > custom > > setup to get to the point. > > > > Above conclusions were coming not from Adrian's case only, believe me :) > > > > Thanks, > > Piotr > > > > pt., 24 maj 2019 o 10:14 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> > > napisał(a): > > > > > Hi Piotr, > > > > > > yes you'r right. But we want both, users and developers. > > > Right now users are covered with SDK nightly builds, and we just need > to > > > get official SDKs generated easily (hopefully thanks to the current > Alex > > > effort) in short period of time (maybe monthly?) > > > The other option is what we're covering here as you stated: developers. > > The > > > problem was that a dev that wants to join us and use maven was not able > > to > > > do that some days ago, and we need to continue improving this (and sdk) > > > builds and instructions since is what lots of people said us few weeks > > ago > > > when we proposed a 1.0 and folks say that we should first concentrate > in > > > make the technology accesible, documented and easy to start with. We > need > > > to go over and over and over until we get it. I think is the only way > so > > > people coming could finaly say "trying royale was a breeze for me" :) > > > > > > > > > > > > El vie., 24 may. 2019 a las 10:03, Piotr Zarzycki (< > > > [email protected]>) escribió: > > > > > > > Hey Guys, > > > > > > > > Everything depends on what kind of user some of you wanted to get. I > > see > > > > that there is and attempt in this thread of getting Developers who > > would > > > > like to work on framework - however maybe it is easier to attract non > > > > framework developers, people who wanted to use Royale, build > > application > > > > without touching framework code. > > > > > > > > I think additionally that building such a big framework will always > > have > > > > some difficult instructions and quite often manual steps to perform. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Piotr > > > > > > > > pt., 24 maj 2019 o 09:55 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> > > > > napisał(a): > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > just a point to add about my initial setup. I assume the config > for a > > > > > newbie is based on the wiki, so he has the environment vars setup > > (is a > > > > > requerimient for now), but he doesn't have maven repository filled > > > since > > > > he > > > > > never tried to build. > > > > > > > > > > But one thing is clear, all process is very complex and filled with > > > many > > > > > points that is our main problem to get traction. People coming is > > > unable > > > > to > > > > > enter Royale world unless is perseverant and recover from various > > > failed > > > > > tries. > > > > > Hope it would be some way to simplify all this to a minimum. Maybe > > the > > > > only > > > > > JS option, that will be hopefully what 90% of users would want from > > > use, > > > > > could a super easy process, simple and with very few internal > process > > > > that > > > > > ensures folks can succeed in 99% of cases. In the other hand, if > they > > > > want > > > > > SWF stuff, then we have all the complexity with flash player, > > debugger, > > > > and > > > > > other adobe stuff that is an additional set of things with other > > > > > requerimients > > > > > > > > > > About videos, is ok for me to do both. The objective is to do 2-3 > min > > > > > videos that will make a difference. Ultra short videos with just > > > straight > > > > > to the core info are proven very useful, so we need something in > that > > > way > > > > > if we want people to join Royale. > > > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El vie., 24 may. 2019 a las 4:40, Alex Harui > > (<[email protected] > > > > >) > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > Over in Ant, there are some rules (at least for now). I don't > > > remember > > > > > > exactly, but I think it is: > > > > > > > > > > > > Either define all 3 variables (PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME, AIR_HOME, > > > > > > FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER) or don't define any of them. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nobody has had the time to make the other combinations work. The > > > > > > rationale is that either someone took the time to set up the > Adobe > > > > stuff > > > > > or > > > > > > they didn't. And so, when long-time committers like yourself and > > > > Carlos > > > > > > are testing, you may not be testing in a true newbie's > > configuration > > > as > > > > > we > > > > > > wouldn't expect them to have any environment variables set, while > > you > > > > and > > > > > > Carlos probably have at least some of them set since that used to > > be > > > > the > > > > > > requirement. > > > > > > > > > > > > The same may be true for Maven. I still haven't found time to > > look, > > > > > > hoping one of you will eventually understand the logic behind > this > > > > stuff > > > > > > and figure it out so I can keep making progress on the release > > > > > automation. > > > > > > > > > > > > In the TestAdapters, IIRC, some of the compiler tests can run > > without > > > > > > Adobe artifacts and/or Flash Player Debugger. A SWF is built, > then > > > > > > SWFDump'd (but never launched in a Flash Player) and the dump is > > > > compared > > > > > > against a reference dump. I know AntTestAdapter does this, I > don't > > > > > > remember if MavenTestAdapter does, hence what I wrote about no > > point > > > in > > > > > > running tests in JS-Only if there are no SWF artifacts and/or no > > > Adobe > > > > > > artifacts. > > > > > > > > > > > > So, IMO, either define all 3 environment variables for Ant or > don't > > > > > define > > > > > > any. And for Maven, the same might be true. If you want to > spend > > > the > > > > > time > > > > > > getting other combinations to work, fine, but IMO the two main > > > > scenarios > > > > > > are 1) You have the Adobe stuff and want SWF artifacts, or 2) You > > > don't > > > > > > have the Adobe stuff nor any environment variables and don’t want > > SWF > > > > > > artifacts. Maybe we don't have to skip tests in those setups. I > > > don't > > > > > > know. > > > > > > > > > > > > HTH, > > > > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/23/19, 3:36 PM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > 'If our tests require Flash, then there is no point in > running > > > them > > > > > if > > > > > > there are no SWF artifacts.' > > > > > > > > > > > > This is just an info dump, in case the following is useful: > > > > > > (short version) My failing combination is a) > > FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER > > > > is > > > > > > defined and b) PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME is not defined and/or local > m2 > > > > does > > > > > > not > > > > > > contain playerglobal swc > > > > > > But this is just with standard maven build, not with profiles > > or > > > > > > anything > > > > > > specified. Also on windows, in case that matters in any way. > > > > > > > > > > > > (Details) > > > > > > I am still getting to grips with 'profiles' in maven. I > > probably > > > > read > > > > > > about > > > > > > that at one point and have used them, but will go back to > > refresh > > > > my > > > > > > knowledge (now that I understand more of the basics). > > > > > > I did observe that the MavenTestAdapter has a getPlayerGlobal > > > > method > > > > > > which > > > > > > looks for the swc in the tests for compiler (not > compiler-jx), > > > this > > > > > > still > > > > > > tries to run the tests if playerglobal is missing (and > assuming > > > the > > > > > > debug > > > > > > player is available), but the player has bad bytecode (e.g. > > error > > > > > > dialogs > > > > > > like TypeError: Error #2023: Class > > > ASDateTests1933741105634631672$ > > > > > must > > > > > > inherit from Sprite to link to the root.) > > > > > > > > > > > > When I look at getPlayerglobal() inside MavenTestAdapter I do > > see > > > > > > something > > > > > > a little confusing (to me). > > > > > > > > > > > > It checks to see if PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME is defined. If it is > not, > > > it > > > > > > bails > > > > > > and returns null. This will cause an error later in testing > > > > > > But PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME does not appear to be used to find the > > > > > > playerglobal > > > > > > swc anywhere else, so this check may not even be relevant. > > > > > > if PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME is defined, then it ignores it and looks > > for > > > > the > > > > > > swc > > > > > > in System.getProperty("mavenLocalRepoDir"). This is why I > think > > > it > > > > > > finds it > > > > > > after it has been cached in local m2 and perhaps why things > > > > continue > > > > > to > > > > > > work when it is removed from the pom dependencies. > > > > > > > > > > > > However, if I unset FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER env var then the > tests > > > > phase > > > > > > passes and the build continues on to completion. > > > > > > So my failing combination is a) FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER is > defined > > > and > > > > > b) > > > > > > PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME is not defined and/or local m2 does not > > contain > > > > > > playerglobal swc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 7:33 AM Alex Harui > > > > <[email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess I am not making a clear statement. I understand > you > > > are > > > > > > trying to > > > > > > > help others, but unless you have tested from scratch with > > both > > > > > > generating > > > > > > > SWF artifacts and not generating SWF artifacts then you > > haven't > > > > > > actually > > > > > > > helped everyone, just those who want the same set of > > artifacts > > > > you > > > > > > are > > > > > > > expecting. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I would not expect any solution to include an Adobe > artifact > > > > > without > > > > > > using > > > > > > > a profile to include it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You might need two videos, one for generating SWF artifacts > > and > > > > one > > > > > > for > > > > > > > not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If our tests require Flash, then there is no point in > running > > > > them > > > > > if > > > > > > > there are no SWF artifacts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/23/19, 11:06 AM, "Carlos Rovira" < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not getting this working only for me, in fact my > > > > motivation > > > > > > was > > > > > > > exactly > > > > > > > the opposite. The final motivation is to able to do a > > short > > > > > > video to > > > > > > > post > > > > > > > on an Apache Royale youtube channel, since is something > > > many, > > > > > > many > > > > > > > people > > > > > > > requested. And something I think will give us more > users > > > and > > > > > > exposure. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was working without problem each day. I tried to > remove > > > > > > repository > > > > > > > folder > > > > > > > to simulate a "day 0" like a new user to see if all was > > > > > working. > > > > > > The > > > > > > > result > > > > > > > was it was failing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now with a dependency added in compiler's pom and a > > profile > > > > > > added in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > wiki instructions, I was able to build from scratch. > > > Other's > > > > > can > > > > > > try > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > to proof is a solution for anyone. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IOW, If a new user tries the wiki steps some days ago > > he'd > > > > > found > > > > > > royale > > > > > > > didn't build, and fails with the error exposed here, > and > > > will > > > > > get > > > > > > > stuck. > > > > > > > Now, hopefully he will get it working. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For me is ok, all you say (maybe the only thing I don't > > > agree > > > > > is > > > > > > put > > > > > > > skipTests to false as an official way to make maven > build > > > > work > > > > > > > officially, > > > > > > > since in maven tests are mandatory, and you must > opt-out, > > > > with > > > > > a > > > > > > > profile o > > > > > > > via command line, but official build should work with > > > normal > > > > > > tests in a > > > > > > > first execution). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > About having a repository or not: This should not > matter, > > > but > > > > > > the fact > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > it currently does, independently of what any of us > want. > > I, > > > > as > > > > > > you, > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > want the simplest way to build, that could be always > the > > > > same, > > > > > > but > > > > > > > there's > > > > > > > a difference in a first maven build of royale against > the > > > > > > subsequent > > > > > > > builds, that can be simplified (removing the -s > > settings... > > > > and > > > > > > the > > > > > > > -Pprofile..). I didn't design the process, but is what > we > > > > have > > > > > > now. So > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > important to test against an empty repository folder, > > > unless > > > > we > > > > > > change > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > build process and get it more simpler, what I don't > > expect > > > to > > > > > > happen > > > > > > > anytime soon, since all of us have many things on plate > > > right > > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we all understand the goals, and that we have > two > > > > sets > > > > > of > > > > > > > outputs. > > > > > > > Right now, I only know how to get one of them. If > there's > > > > other > > > > > > one you > > > > > > > know you can post it here and I can put on wiki, or > > > directly > > > > > > modify > > > > > > > wiki > > > > > > > page that is the official one. If you can do the > second, > > it > > > > > > would be > > > > > > > great > > > > > > > since it will be more accurate to what you have in > mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you have no time fo now what we can do is: > > > > > > > 2 > > > > > > > a) I can reintroduce the "-Putils" line in the wiki as > > > > > something > > > > > > to do > > > > > > > in a > > > > > > > concrete case, since right now (at the time we are > > writing > > > > > > this), as > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > posted is important in a concrete situation, but not in > > > > > building > > > > > > from > > > > > > > scratch (for now until your changes will be merged). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > b) As soon as you get your branch working and merged in > > > > > develop, > > > > > > you > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > change the wiki to conform to the needs of the changes > > you > > > > will > > > > > > > introduce > > > > > > > in your branch. I'll be interested in give a hand here > > and > > > > test > > > > > > it > > > > > > > againts > > > > > > > an empty repo, and from a Mac, and help to refine the > > > process > > > > > > and the > > > > > > > wiki > > > > > > > if needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > About the planned video, since is a time consuming work > > > maybe > > > > > > better to > > > > > > > postpone until your work is merged so I can create one > > that > > > > > > doesn't get > > > > > > > obsolete in few days. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's ok for you? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El jue., 23 may. 2019 a las 18:29, Alex Harui > > > > > > > (<[email protected]>) > > > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/23/19, 3:04 AM, "Carlos Rovira" < > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > El jue., 23 may. 2019 a las 3:49, Alex Harui > > > > > > > (<[email protected] > > > > > > > > >) > > > > > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Before we go too far in any one direction, I > may > > > not > > > > be > > > > > > able to > > > > > > > > respond > > > > > > > > > fully to this thread today as there seems to > be a > > > lot > > > > > to > > > > > > catch > > > > > > > up > > > > > > > > on, but > > > > > > > > > let me try to summarize the goals of the Maven > > > build. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) There are some helper jars > > (compiler-build-tools > > > > and > > > > > > > > > compiler-jburg-types). They are built by the > > > "utils" > > > > > > > profile. They > > > > > > > > > haven't changed in develop, but they will > change > > in > > > > > > 0.9.6. > > > > > > > They've > > > > > > > > been > > > > > > > > > changed in the release_practice branch. So > folks > > > > will > > > > > > need to > > > > > > > use > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > "utils" profile whenever we (rarely) change > those > > > > jars. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, so we should put in wiki that utils profile > is > > > > needed > > > > > > for > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > case, > > > > > > > > but not for "initial" build case. I'm worried to > > try > > > to > > > > > > simplify > > > > > > > > instructions and process to minumun needs to > avoid > > > new > > > > > > comers > > > > > > > > confusion. > > > > > > > > So, I'll mention utils profile as a special case > to > > > > > > execute when > > > > > > > > needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As soon as I merge release_practice into develop, you > > > will > > > > > > need to > > > > > > > use the > > > > > > > > utils profile to build from scratch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Adobe will probably never publish official > > > > > > playerglobal on > > > > > > > Maven. > > > > > > > > > There is a whole bunch of logic in the > Mavenizer > > to > > > > > > address > > > > > > > licensing > > > > > > > > > acceptance issues. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > For what we discussed in the thread, seems > > > playerglobal > > > > > is > > > > > > > already on > > > > > > > > maven > > > > > > > > official repos, so my guest is we are served with > > > that > > > > > and > > > > > > don't > > > > > > > need > > > > > > > > adobe > > > > > > > > host it in a maven repo. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Adobe has not given permission to distribute > > playerglobal > > > > in > > > > > > this > > > > > > > way so > > > > > > > > we cannot use it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 3) IIRC, the most recent changes were to allow > > the > > > > > Maven > > > > > > build > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > work > > > > > > > > > without requiring SWF versions of artifacts and > > > > > probably > > > > > > > > > playerglobal/airglobal. So, adding hard > > > requirements > > > > > to > > > > > > > > playerglobal will > > > > > > > > > defeat this capability unless those > dependencies > > > are > > > > in > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > appropriate > > > > > > > > > Maven profile. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right now we need to do this: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mvn -s settings-template.xml clean install > > > > > > > -Pgenerate-swcs-for-swf > > > > > > > > so this means something is not working ok in a > > clean > > > > > > environment > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > first > > > > > > > > build/install? > > > > > > > > For now, the current instructions works, but if > > > that's > > > > > the > > > > > > case, > > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > should > > > > > > > > try to fix this in the future, although seems > this > > is > > > > not > > > > > > urgent > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > people is capable of build Royale in the current > > way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The goal for Maven, like the goal for the Ant builds, > > is > > > to > > > > > not > > > > > > > require > > > > > > > > Adobe artifacts and build JS-only versions. Building > > SWF > > > > > > versions is > > > > > > > > opt-in. I'm not surprised there are bugs after these > > > > > changes, > > > > > > but > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > solutions should consider that there are two > different > > > sets > > > > > of > > > > > > > output. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 4) The CI builds (builds.a.o and > > > apachroyalecibuild) > > > > > are > > > > > > good > > > > > > > > reference > > > > > > > > > examples of Maven building things correctly on > > > > Windows. > > > > > > You > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > compare > > > > > > > > > your setup and console output to those builds. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was building without problem and still can > build > > > > > without > > > > > > > problem. My > > > > > > > > concern was for the case people tries to build > > maven > > > > for > > > > > > the > > > > > > > first > > > > > > > > time, > > > > > > > > and was where I found problems. This problems are > > as > > > > well > > > > > > not > > > > > > > > reproduced in > > > > > > > > machines that are already working, since they > pass > > > the > > > > > > initial > > > > > > > setup. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 5) There might be some assumption that > airglobal > > > > and/or > > > > > > > playerglobal > > > > > > > > exist > > > > > > > > > to determine whether the build is going to try > to > > > > > output > > > > > > SWF > > > > > > > > versions of > > > > > > > > > the artifacts or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 6) The default, IIRC, is to not require > > > > > > airglobal/playerglobal > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > build a > > > > > > > > > JS-Only set of artifacts similar to how it is > > done > > > in > > > > > > the Ant > > > > > > > builds. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, this wiki walkthrough: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Fwiki%2FBuild-Apache-Royale-with-Maven&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C216792e9f44d47dff61208d6dfcf2157%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942478056043286&sdata=tv9uPSXTrChT%2FGaw%2F2XtrpFcxJ46vDyzjH7jfYz6piU%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > is describing whole process without > > differentiation. > > > > > > > > can be updated to build with maven SWF/JS and in > > the > > > > > other > > > > > > hand > > > > > > > only > > > > > > > > JS? > > > > > > > > I think the actual page description us for > SWF/JS, > > > and > > > > I > > > > > > > personally > > > > > > > > never > > > > > > > > try / or know how to build just JS, what would be > > > very > > > > > > > interesting > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > many people will really only build for JS, and if > > > > > sometime > > > > > > in the > > > > > > > > future we > > > > > > > > have other interesting target like WebAsembly, > will > > > > want > > > > > > to add > > > > > > > it and > > > > > > > > build JS/WEBASM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was unaware of the page so it didn’t get updated > with > > > > these > > > > > > > changes to > > > > > > > > not require SWF artifacts. So it does need updating, > > but > > > > it > > > > > > would > > > > > > > be best > > > > > > > > to first make it clear that there are two sets of > > output. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, that means that most of the > ideas > > > I've > > > > > > read > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > skimming > > > > > > > > > over this thread so far may not be correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think you have to have in mind that we all was > > > > working > > > > > > right > > > > > > > with our > > > > > > > > current environment and that the problem comes > from > > > try > > > > > to > > > > > > start > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > scratch. Subsequents builds instructions are > > simpler > > > > > since > > > > > > > requires > > > > > > > > shorter > > > > > > > > instructions. > > > > > > > > You should try to rename your "repository" folder > > and > > > > > > create a > > > > > > > new one > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > try to build with maven to see what you find and > if > > > we > > > > > can > > > > > > > improve > > > > > > > > actual > > > > > > > > findings. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Someday I will find time to do that. May not be > today. > > > It > > > > > > is, IMO, > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > important for others to understand the goals and how > > this > > > > > stuff > > > > > > > works so it > > > > > > > > isn't all on me. My understanding of Maven, which I > am > > > not > > > > > an > > > > > > > expert, is > > > > > > > > that what is in your local repository shouldn’t > matter. > > > > > Maven > > > > > > goes > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > gets the dependencies you ask for in the pom.xml. > The > > > only > > > > > > "trick" > > > > > > > is how > > > > > > > > the Mavenizer extension works. That is the only > thing > > > that > > > > > > doesn't > > > > > > > fetch > > > > > > > > from Maven Central. So renaming or flushing the > > > repository > > > > > > > "shouldn't" > > > > > > > > make a difference and someone should figure out why, > > but > > > > only > > > > > > after > > > > > > > making > > > > > > > > sure the configurations make sense. Maybe all of the > > SWC > > > > > POMs > > > > > > in > > > > > > > > royale-asjs need a profile that opt-in the SWF > > artifacts. > > > > > That > > > > > > > might be > > > > > > > > the actual issue. And maybe we set skipTests=false > in > > > the > > > > > > compiler > > > > > > > if not > > > > > > > > using SWF artifacts via some profile. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The key point is that you can't just "get it working > > for > > > > > > you". We > > > > > > > have to > > > > > > > > maintain the two sets of outputs for others. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > HTH, > > > > > > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Carlos Rovira > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C216792e9f44d47dff61208d6dfcf2157%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942478056043286&sdata=3lU8ntUGoybH%2BtfvVQNOtDS6NLDn4HIwaj75I82dQqM%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Carlos Rovira > > > > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > > > > > > > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > > > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Carlos Rovira > > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > > > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira > -- Piotr Zarzycki Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
