Hi Alex, I guess you might be back on Royale about now. Just a heads up: I am about 20-30 mins max from merging in what I have. Hope that's still ok... please let me know if not. Thanks, -Greg
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 7:51 AM Greg Dove <greg.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks Alex - I'll try to hit the window, much appreciated! > > > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 6:57 AM Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> > wrote: > >> Hi Greg, >> >> It turns out I have a "split shift" today. I'm stopping work for the >> next 7 or 8 hours then will get around to the merge. So if you can get >> your changes merged in that amount of time, then I will wait for you and >> deal with any merge conflicts (there are almost certain to be some). >> >> -Alex >> >> On 6/10/19, 11:46 AM, "Greg Dove" <greg.d...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Alex, slightly OT, but in terms of coordination: fyi I am also very >> close >> to merging the language improvements branch into develop. As I already >> mentioned elsewhere, I was hoping to do that a couple of days back, >> but >> some recent things also took me a little longer than expected (I have >> additional local changes/fixes not yet in remote branch) . I was >> planning >> to merge that today also. >> >> However, I will wait until after your merge, so I'm hoping you can get >> yours in today (if not, I will wait). I will probably put mine in as a >> squashed commit after yours. >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 6:05 AM Piotr Zarzycki < >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi Alex, >> > >> > Many thanks for that! I will try to be RM. I will have some >> dedicated time >> > for that. I will wait for your instruction and merge to develop. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Piotr >> > >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 7:31 PM Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> >> wrote: >> > >> > > Well, that turned out to be much more time-consuming than I >> expected, but >> > > we can now create identical release artifacts on Mac and Win. I >> am >> > hopeful >> > > this effort will pay off not only now in having other folks >> generate >> > > releases, but also in the future if signed binaries become a >> requirement. >> > > >> > > There continues to be a lot of distractions in my life that can >> cause >> > > delays, but I hope to merge the release_practice branches into >> develop >> > over >> > > the next day or two and figure out where in the wiki to document >> the >> > > release process. So, now is the time for one or more people to >> step up >> > to >> > > be the RMs for 0.9.6 and help debug and improve the process. >> > > >> > > I am going to try very hard not to "own" the process. If >> something goes >> > > wrong, I am going to ask others to try to debug and fix it first >> because >> > it >> > > is in the project's best interests for others to truly understand >> how >> > this >> > > stuff works. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > -Alex >> > > >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >> wrote: >> > > >> > > It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the same >> binaries >> > > on Mac and Win. I now have the identical binaries for >> royale-compiler >> > and >> > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on royale-asjs. >> I might >> > > get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs will >> magically >> > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match. Then we have to make the Ant >> > artifacts >> > > match. >> > > >> > > There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life >> which has >> > > also impeded progress. I hope to make much progress this coming >> week and >> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or volunteers) >> to test >> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6. I am not going >> to be >> > the >> > > RM. >> > > >> > > -Alex >> > > >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" < >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > Hi Alex, >> > > >> > > It's been a while since you have started effort with >> automating >> > > build. >> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6. >> Do you >> > > need any >> > > help with this ? >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Piotr >> > > >> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui >> <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> >> > > napisał(a): >> > > >> > > > Update: >> > > > >> > > > In order to make verification of binary release packages >> > created >> > > on the >> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts >> and >> > > tools to try to >> > > > generate reproducible binaries. I've seen two >> different builds >> > > compare on >> > > > my Mac. The next challenge will be to see if the >> server can >> > > build a >> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac. >> > > > >> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg. The >> version >> > of >> > > JBurg we >> > > > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't >> > > reproduce the same >> > > > name each time. I have changes to JBurg ready, however >> JBurg >> > is >> > > currently >> > > > under CPL which is category B. We only need one file, >> we don't >> > > need or >> > > > want all of JBurg at this time. The one JBurg file is >> jointly >> > > owned by >> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood. I've contact Tom and he will be >> filing >> > > an ICLA and >> > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in >> that one >> > > file. >> > > > >> > > > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by >> > > Tom/Adobe. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java >> > > > >> > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the >> method >> > names >> > > the same, >> > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then >> we can >> > > try cutting >> > > > a release. I'm thinking we'll be at that point in >> early May, >> > so >> > > now is the >> > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release. >> > > > >> > > > Thanks, >> > > > -Alex >> > > > >> > > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> >> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > I would much rather have others find and fix issues >> > > themselves. That >> > > > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain >> the >> > > system. It >> > > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can >> work on the >> > > release. >> > > > There are 14 steps. Literally, 14 different people >> could >> > > execute one step >> > > > each. >> > > > >> > > > My 2 cents, >> > > > -Alex >> > > > >> > > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" < >> > carlosrov...@apache.org> >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Hi Alex, >> > > > >> > > > amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! >> :) >> > > > >> > > > I need to put my head on all of this, but count >> on me >> > to >> > > be a RM. >> > > > I think >> > > > the best thing should be that you be the first >> RM to >> > try >> > > your own >> > > > development at least for the first time, and >> then the >> > > rest of us >> > > > will >> > > > follow you on the next releases. With all this >> on place >> > > we maybe >> > > > could >> > > > release once a month or every two months... >> > > > >> > > > Thanks for doing this :) >> > > > >> > > > Carlos >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui >> > > > (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) >> > > > escribió: >> > > > >> > > > > OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps >> to build >> > > the release >> > > > > artifacts. Folks interested in Docker-izing >> the >> > steps >> > > are >> > > > welcome to look >> > > > > at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on >> the CI >> > > server. >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> http://apacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/view/Royale%20Release/ >> > > > > >> > > > > These steps assume that the RM can run the >> basic >> > Maven >> > > and Ant >> > > > build on >> > > > > the RM's computer. I think that's a fair >> requirement >> > > since all >> > > > of us on the >> > > > > PMC need to able to do that to build the RC >> in order >> > > to vote on >> > > > it. >> > > > > Jenkins does other tasks like run the Maven >> release >> > > plugin >> > > > steps. >> > > > > >> > > > > Currently that results in binaries on Jenkins >> that >> > are >> > > > downloaded to the >> > > > > RM's computer. These binaries need to be >> verified by >> > > the RM >> > > > which is the >> > > > > next phase I will be starting on now. The RM >> > verifies >> > > the bits >> > > > and then >> > > > > PGP signs them. And then the bits are >> uploaded off >> > > the RM's >> > > > computer to >> > > > > Maven Staging or dist.a.o/dev. If that >> uploading >> > > turns out to >> > > > be a point >> > > > > of failure, we have the option of having >> Jenkins >> > > upload the big >> > > > files and >> > > > > have the RM only upload PGP signature files. >> Or >> > > finding a way >> > > > for Jenkins >> > > > > to get the signature files from the RM. The >> uploads >> > > worked fine >> > > > for me, >> > > > > but then again, so did the old script's >> uploads. >> > > > > >> > > > > Therefore, once I get the binary verification >> phase >> > > completed, I >> > > > think >> > > > > someone other than me should be the RM and >> try to use >> > > these >> > > > steps to >> > > > > generate the release and help debug the >> process for >> > > the next >> > > > RM. So, >> > > > > please try to carve out some time to be the >> RM. One >> > > advantage >> > > > of doing >> > > > > most of the work on Jenkins is that it frees >> up my >> > > computer to >> > > > do other >> > > > > things while Jenkins is cranking away. >> > > > > >> > > > > I think we're at least a week away from binary >> > > verification, >> > > > maybe two, so >> > > > > it is time to start thinking about what is >> going in >> > > this release. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > -Alex >> > > > > >> > > > > On 3/7/19, 4:15 PM, "Alex Harui" >> > > <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > In case you haven't guessed, I'm testing >> out >> > > Jenkins and its >> > > > ability >> > > > > to create the artifacts and send emails. >> Please >> > > ignore any >> > > > email that >> > > > > looks like a vote or discuss thread. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > -Alex >> > > > > >> > > > > On 2/10/19, 8:44 PM, "Alex Harui" >> > > <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > Om, >> > > > > >> > > > > Well, that's what I used for the last >> > > release. I'm sure >> > > > there is >> > > > > probably some inaccuracy in it. >> > > > > >> > > > > That said, I'm abandoning that >> document and >> > > taking a new >> > > > angle >> > > > > because that document presumed that the >> release >> > > manager was >> > > > trying to >> > > > > create a release on his/her computer. I've >> given up >> > > on that and >> > > > working on >> > > > > making releases from a shared computer for the >> > reasons >> > > I've >> > > > stated >> > > > > upthread. I hope to make some progress on >> that this >> > > week. >> > > > > >> > > > > The key difference is that the new >> angle does >> > > not >> > > > presume that you >> > > > > have Git SSH and PGP signatures all set up on >> some >> > > computer. I >> > > > have not >> > > > > looked into how Docker would handle that. You >> > > certainly >> > > > wouldn't want the >> > > > > Docker image to contain your SSH or PGP >> keys/creds. >> > > And if the >> > > > Docker >> > > > > image doesn't, then that is another stumbling >> block >> > > for future >> > > > RMs. >> > > > > >> > > > > The other key difference is that the >> old >> > > script presumed >> > > > you could >> > > > > create the 3 release in 3 huge "easy" steps. >> We've >> > > seen that is >> > > > only true >> > > > > for me. So the new angle creates many >> discrete steps >> > > managed by >> > > > Jenkins. >> > > > > >> > > > > So, it is up to you to decide what >> you want >> > to >> > > > "Docker-ize". You >> > > > > can try to Docker-ize the current 3 big >> steps, so RMs >> > > can try to >> > > > run it on >> > > > > their systems, but I'd bet they will just >> faiI due to >> > > network >> > > > issues. I >> > > > > would be interested in using Docker to make >> each of >> > > these many >> > > > discrete >> > > > > steps portable to another server. I'm not >> going to >> > > involve >> > > > Docker at this >> > > > > point. My main goal is just to see if I can >> create a >> > > workflow >> > > > of many >> > > > > discrete steps that isn't horribly painful. >> Once we >> > > see what >> > > > these steps >> > > > > turn out to be, then we can worry about server >> > > portability of >> > > > those steps. >> > > > > >> > > > > Either way, we want to know about >> running >> > > > Browser+Selenium for >> > > > > sure. And maybe FlashPlayerDebugger or AIR. >> I would >> > > want to >> > > > know, for >> > > > > example, how you debug a failing checkintest >> in a >> > > Docker >> > > > container. >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > -Alex >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On 2/10/19, 5:18 PM, "OmPrakash >> Muppirala" < >> > > > bigosma...@gmail.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > Alex, >> > > > > >> > > > > Just to be clear, I am following >> the >> > steps >> > > from here >> > > > to try >> > > > > and setup a >> > > > > docker container. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/wiki/Release-Manager-Notes >> > > > > >> > > > > Is this doc up to date? >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > Om >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:02 PM >> OmPrakash >> > > Muppirala < >> > > > > bigosma...@gmail.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > One approach is to have each >> step in >> > the >> > > process >> > > > spin up a >> > > > > docker image. >> > > > > > And use docker-compose to run >> each >> > > step. All the >> > > > images can >> > > > > be made to >> > > > > > share a common volume where all >> the >> > > artifacts are >> > > > stored >> > > > > across steps. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > You are right about the >> networking >> > issue >> > > though. >> > > > Any >> > > > > network related >> > > > > > failure that occurs on the host >> machine >> > > will most >> > > > likely >> > > > > occur in the >> > > > > > docker container. Although, I >> am not >> > > clear how we >> > > > can >> > > > > guarantee that the >> > > > > > same issues will not occur on >> the >> > > Jenkins server. >> > > > I mean, >> > > > > what is special >> > > > > > about the Jenkins server that >> makes it >> > > immune to >> > > > these >> > > > > networking issues? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > Om >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 11:48 AM >> Alex >> > > Harui >> > > > > <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> Again, I don't know anything >> about >> > > Docker, but >> > > > before we >> > > > > spend a lot of >> > > > > >> time on Docker, I also want to >> point >> > > out that the >> > > > process >> > > > > to create a >> > > > > >> release cannot really be >> thought of as >> > > "one >> > > > application". >> > > > > It will be a >> > > > > >> series of "steps" to run. >> How many >> > > steps >> > > > depends on >> > > > > whether we think we >> > > > > >> can isolate enough stuff via >> Docker to >> > > be able to >> > > > run >> > > > > Docker on the RM's >> > > > > >> computer instead of some shared >> > > computer. On a >> > > > shared >> > > > > computer there will >> > > > > >> be dozens of steps because the >> RM will >> > > need to >> > > > enter >> > > > > passwords to commit >> > > > > >> stuff. On a local computer I >> guess >> > the >> > > RM can >> > > > supply >> > > > > passwords but I think >> > > > > >> there will be stopping points >> where >> > the >> > > Maven >> > > > artifacts are >> > > > > deployed and >> > > > > >> the staging repo is closed, and >> > another >> > > stopping >> > > > point for >> > > > > the vote. It >> > > > > >> seems like Docker works by >> downloading >> > > > dependencies. Given >> > > > > that the >> > > > > >> problem the RMs had last time >> involved >> > > downloads >> > > > and >> > > > > uploads, why do we >> > > > > >> think Docker will really solve >> this >> > for >> > > creating >> > > > releases >> > > > > on local machines? >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> The reason to do this on a >> shared >> > > machine is so >> > > > that new >> > > > > RMs don't have >> > > > > >> to do as much setup. But then >> I >> > wonder >> > > about the >> > > > > efficiency of kicking off >> > > > > >> that many Docker images. >> Jenkins can >> > > manage that >> > > > already. >> > > > > Does Docker >> > > > > >> have some sort of similar >> Dashboard or >> > > would we >> > > > use Jenkins >> > > > > to kick off >> > > > > >> Docker steps? I can't quite >> picture >> > > what is the >> > > > outermost >> > > > > >> control/dashboard. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> -Alex >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> On 2/6/19, 11:03 AM, "Harbs" < >> > > > harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> A quick search turns up >> this: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://codingsans.com/blog/selenium-with-docker-testing >> > > > > >> < >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://codingsans.com/blog/selenium-with-docker-testing >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://www.blazemeter.com/blog/how-to-run-selenium-tests-in-docker >> > > > > >> < >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://www.blazemeter.com/blog/how-to-run-selenium-tests-in-docker >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/docker-selenium >> > > > > >> < >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/docker-selenium >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 >> PM, Alex >> > > Harui >> > > > > <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >> > > > > >> wrote: >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Thanks for volunteering >> to try >> > it >> > > Om. IMO, >> > > > even more >> > > > > important >> > > > > >> than Firefox+Flash is >> > > SomeBrowser+Selenium. We >> > > > may also >> > > > > need to run Adobe >> > > > > >> AIR's adb. We could probably >> turn off >> > > the Flash >> > > > tests or >> > > > > replace Flash >> > > > > >> with AIR. >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Thanks, >> > > > > >> > -Alex >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, >> "Carlos >> > > Rovira" < >> > > > > carlosrov...@apache.org> >> > > > > >> wrote: >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > Hi Om, that would be >> great! >> > > waiting for >> > > > your >> > > > > experience with a >> > > > > >> that! :) >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > El mié., 6 feb. 2019 >> a las >> > > 19:31, >> > > > OmPrakash >> > > > > Muppirala (< >> > > > > >> bigosma...@gmail.com>) >> > > > > >> > escribió: >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> Yes, I agree with Alex >> about >> > not >> > > being >> > > > able to run >> > > > > UI out of docker >> > > > > >> >> containers. I never >> thought of >> > > the >> > > > checkintests >> > > > > when I made the >> > > > > >> >> suggestion. >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> The firefox-flash image >> that >> > > Yishay >> > > > pointed out >> > > > > looks promising. >> > > > > >> I will >> > > > > >> >> poke around with it and >> see if >> > > that works >> > > > for us. >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> Thanks, >> > > > > >> >> Om >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at >> 12:41 AM >> > > Yishay >> > > > Weiss < >> > > > > >> yishayj...@hotmail.com> >> > > > > >> >> wrote: >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >>> I’ll let Om or someone >> else >> > > with docker >> > > > experience >> > > > > tell us if >> > > > > >> this [1] is >> > > > > >> >>> relevant. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> [1] >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://hub.docker.com/r/beli/firefox-flash/ >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > ________________________________ >> > > > > >> >>> From: Alex Harui >> > > <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID >> > > > > >> > > > > >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, >> February 6, >> > > 2019 >> > > > 10:05:54 AM >> > > > > >> >>> To: >> dev@royale.apache.org >> > > > > >> >>> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 >> Release >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> I don't anything about >> docker, >> > > but in 15 >> > > > minutes of >> > > > > reading I ran >> > > > > >> into >> > > > > >> >>> this: >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://www.channelfutures.com/open-source/when-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containers >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> Which says: Docker >> can't " Run >> > > > applications with >> > > > > graphical >> > > > > >> interfaces". >> > > > > >> >>> If you want Royale to >> use >> > > Docker for >> > > > releases, show >> > > > > that it can >> > > > > >> run >> > > > > >> >>> checkintests with >> Flash and >> > the >> > > Browser. >> > > > Then I >> > > > > will look into >> > > > > >> it more. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> The highest level goal >> is to >> > > make it as >> > > > easy as >> > > > > possible for >> > > > > >> someone to >> > > > > >> >>> volunteer to be an >> RM. Any >> > > requirement >> > > > of "install >> > > > > this (Docker, >> > > > > >> etc) on >> > > > > >> >>> your computer" is, IMO, >> > another >> > > barrier >> > > > to entry. >> > > > > Yeah, RMs will >> > > > > >> have to >> > > > > >> >>> have Maven installed >> and maybe >> > > Ant, but >> > > > you should >> > > > > already have >> > > > > >> those >> > > > > >> >>> installed to be a >> > committer/PMC >> > > member. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> That said, a good >> takeaway >> > from >> > > the >> > > > Docker idea is >> > > > > to try to find >> > > > > >> a way >> > > > > >> >> to >> > > > > >> >>> make an "Image" of >> whatever we >> > > end up >> > > > with on >> > > > > whatever server we >> > > > > >> end up >> > > > > >> >>> using so if the image >> can be >> > > copied and >> > > > used on >> > > > > other servers. >> > > > > >> I'm not >> > > > > >> >>> exactly sure how to do >> that >> > > with Azure, >> > > > which hosts >> > > > > my CI >> > > > > >> server. I will >> > > > > >> >>> spend a few more >> minutes >> > > researching that. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> I could not quickly >> find any >> > > way to get a >> > > > free VM >> > > > > on Azure or AWS >> > > > > >> that >> > > > > >> >>> isn't a >> > > > free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year. So, >> > > > > unless someone >> > > > > >> comes >> > > > > >> >> up >> > > > > >> >>> with a free server we >> can use >> > > "forever", >> > > > I'm going >> > > > > to just start >> > > > > >> with my >> > > > > >> >>> Azure VM. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> -Alex >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, >> "Carlos >> > > Rovira" < >> > > > > carlosrov...@apache.org> >> > > > > >> wrote: >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> Hi. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> the plan sounds >> very good >> > to >> > > me. Just >> > > > my 2 >> > > > > thoughts on this: >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> 1.- As I was >> reading I was >> > > thinking as >> > > > well on >> > > > > something like >> > > > > >> Docker >> > > > > >> >>> and >> > > > > >> >>> see Om as well >> thinking on >> > > the same. >> > > > Maybe is >> > > > > the way to this >> > > > > >> with >> > > > > >> >> the >> > > > > >> >>> actual technology. >> Seems >> > VMs >> > > are >> > > > stepping out a >> > > > > bit this days >> > > > > >> in >> > > > > >> >> favor >> > > > > >> >>> of >> > > > > >> >>> things like Docker. >> Maybe >> > > the same did >> > > > Git over >> > > > > Svn, and today >> > > > > >> Svn is >> > > > > >> >>> an >> > > > > >> >>> old remembrance. I >> must say >> > > that I >> > > > have no >> > > > > experience with >> > > > > >> Docker, so >> > > > > >> >>> doing >> > > > > >> >>> that will require >> acquire >> > > that >> > > > knowledge, but >> > > > > seems it could >> > > > > >> be worth >> > > > > >> >>> it. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> 2.- Maybe is not >> possible, >> > > but I want >> > > > to propose >> > > > > to do this >> > > > > >> work I a >> > > > > >> >>> separate branch, so >> it >> > could >> > > be in >> > > > parallel to >> > > > > other >> > > > > >> developments. I >> > > > > >> >>> think >> > > > > >> >>> work over develop is >> > > practical if >> > > > there's >> > > > > something tiny that >> > > > > >> could >> > > > > >> >> be >> > > > > >> >>> done >> > > > > >> >>> in a commit. But as >> we need >> > > more than >> > > > one, or is >> > > > > a long >> > > > > >> process (like >> > > > > >> >>> this), chances are >> to make >> > > develop >> > > > branch >> > > > > unstable and even >> > > > > >> for some >> > > > > >> >>> days. >> > > > > >> >>> I think we should >> try to >> > > avoid that >> > > > scenario, >> > > > > and branches are >> > > > > >> the >> > > > > >> >> best >> > > > > >> >>> way. If we do this >> way, >> > > we'll benefit >> > > > of more >> > > > > reliable develop >> > > > > >> >> branch. >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> Thanks and good to >> know of >> > > this plan :) >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> Carlos >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>> El mar., 5 feb. >> 2019 a las >> > > 23:19, >> > > > Harbs (< >> > > > > >> harbs.li...@gmail.com>) >> > > > > >> >>> escribió: >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >>>> I’ve never used Docker >> > myself, >> > > but that >> > > > might be a >> > > > > good plan. >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>> On Feb 6, 2019, at >> 12:07 AM, >> > > OmPrakash >> > > > Muppirala < >> > > > > >> >>> bigosma...@gmail.com> >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote: >> > > > > >> >>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>> I was wondering if >> we can >> > use >> > > docker >> > > > images to >> > > > > setup and seal >> > > > > >> the >> > > > > >> >>> RM >> > > > > >> >>>>> environment. Then >> other RMs >> > > simply >> > > > need to run >> > > > > the image >> > > > > >> locally >> > > > > >> >>> and run >> > > > > >> >>>>> the release >> scripts. Might >> > > be easier. >> > > > If folks >> > > > > like this plan, >> > > > > >> >> I >> > > > > >> >>> can >> > > > > >> >>>> try >> > > > > >> >>>>> to put something >> together. >> > > > > >> >>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>> Thanks, >> > > > > >> >>>>> Om >> > > > > >> >>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 >> at 1:40 >> > > PM Harbs < >> > > > > harbs.li...@gmail.com> >> > > > > >> >>> wrote: >> > > > > >> >>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>> In a recent >> discussion, it >> > > looks like >> > > > other >> > > > > projects have >> > > > > >> gotten >> > > > > >> >>>> resources >> > > > > >> >>>>>> from AWS. >> > > > > >> >>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>> Whatever service we >> use, >> > > could setup a >> > > > “shared” >> > > > > Royale account >> > > > > >> >>> that all >> > > > > >> >>>>>> PMC members could >> have >> > > access to. >> > > > > >> >>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>> I don’t know if >> there’s >> > some >> > > way we >> > > > could >> > > > > leverage Gitlab’s >> > > > > >> >>> integration >> > > > > >> >>>>>> pipelines >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html >> > > > > >> >>> < >> > > > > >> >>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>> >> > > > > >> >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Feb 5, 2019, at >> 11:33 >> > > PM, Alex >> > > > Harui >> > > > > >> >> >> <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID >> > > > > >> >>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Well, the big hole >> in this >> > > plan is >> > > > that I think >> > > > > we have to use >> > > > > >> >>>> someone's >> > > > > >> >>>>>> personal VM account >> (in >> > this >> > > case, >> > > > mine). I >> > > > > can't think of a >> > > > > >> >> way >> > > > > >> >>> we can >> > > > > >> >>>>>> run interactive >> commands >> > > like git push >> > > > on builds@. >> > > > > But that >> > > > > >> >>> reminds me >> > > > > >> >>>>>> to go see what are >> current >> > > options are >> > > > for >> > > > > free/cheap compute >> > > > > >> >>> servers. >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On 2/5/19, 1:20 >> PM, "Piotr >> > > Zarzycki" < >> > > > > >> >> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> >> > > > > >> >>>> wrote: >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Sounds like best >> plan >> > > ever. Using >> > > > the same PC >> > > > > by everyone is >> > > > > >> >>> awesome! >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 5, >> 2019, 8:39 >> > > PM Harbs < >> > > > > harbs.li...@gmail.com >> > > > > >> >>> wrote: >> > > > > >> >>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> A big +1 from me! >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Looking forward! >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 5, 2019, >> at 9:34 >> > > PM, Alex >> > > > Harui >> > > > > >> >>> >> <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> >> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Hi, >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> We are coming up >> on 3 >> > > months since >> > > > 0.9.4. I >> > > > > have finished >> > > > > >> >> the >> > > > > >> >>>> changes >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> to get production >> Royale >> > > modules to >> > > > work in >> > > > > Tour De Flex. >> > > > > >> >> Lots >> > > > > >> >>> of >> > > > > >> >>>> other >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good changes have >> been >> > > contributed. >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> There were >> emails around >> > > the 0.9.4 >> > > > release >> > > > > about others >> > > > > >> >>> stepping up >> > > > > >> >>>> to >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> cut the next >> release, but >> > > that hasn't >> > > > > happened. I tried and >> > > > > >> >>> failed to >> > > > > >> >>>>>> get >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Apache Infra to >> allow us >> > > to run our >> > > > release >> > > > > packaging on the >> > > > > >> >>> Jenkins >> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> servers. They >> felt there >> > > were too >> > > > many >> > > > > security concerns >> > > > > >> with >> > > > > >> > >> >> >>
