The merge is complete, and the main builds seem to be successful, except for
Maven on royale-asjs which was failing before the merge.
I'm still catching up on other things, but I think there are some bugs we need
to fix before cutting the release? I think ASDoc may not be fully working?
What else?
-Alex
On 6/10/19, 11:05 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
> > >
