Hi Josh, you're right in all what you said. You resume all what we want to do. Thanks :)
El mié., 18 mar. 2020 a las 20:27, Josh Tynjala (<[email protected]>) escribió: > As I said, I want them to restore the current process to working order > before they start — because their work should not be assumed to be a > guaranteed success. It seems like that's what they plan to do, and they > have acknowledged that their plan may not work out. > > As I understand it, one part of the Apache Way is welcoming contributors to > scratch their own itch. Various forms of this discussion have been bubbling > up again and again for years. At some point, we need to acknowledge that > this is a sign that we have failed to follow the Apache Way. I believe that > it's beyond time for Carlos and Chris to try out their plan and I'm excited > to see how it goes. > > -- > Josh Tynjala > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev> > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 10:59 AM Alex Harui <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I'm trying to avoid having Carlos and Chris spend a lot of time tossing > > out something that worked and replacing it with something that didn't > work > > in the past. How often is that a good decision? What makes it hard is > > that there is a chance it will work for them, and then it won't work for > > others. That is the lesson we learned the hard way. So we won't know > how > > good it is until someone else tries it and runs into the same issues we > had > > before. Note that the two people who have actually cut a release want to > > just get the current process to work again. Everyone else is just > talking > > from theory, not reality. > > > > And it will all be moot if we don't get the current process fixed and a > > release out ASAP. > > > > I only found build instructions at the wiki link that Carlos provided, > not > > release instructions. It made me look at the royale-compiler pom and it > > appears that the compiler-build-tools and compiler-jburg-types project > > builds have been removed. So I am not clear on how to build those two > > artifacts with Maven should we need to change them in the future. This > is > > not raising my level of confidence in their plans at all. It is not fair > > to toss out important things and then claim things are simpler. > > > > -Alex > > > > On 3/18/20, 10:25 AM, "Josh Tynjala" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Agreed. Just do it! You shouldn't need consensus here. If it's as > much > > better as you claim it will be, I don't see anyone refusing to switch > > to > > the new process. However, if you insist on consensus, let this be my > > +1. > > > > However, someone else may want to try doing a release with the old > > process > > in the meantime. With that in mind, before you get started on the new > > process, you should ensure that the old one is not still broken from > > the > > recent Maven build changes. (It sounds like Chris is already trying > to > > fix > > this, so great!) > > > > -- > > Josh Tynjala > > Bowler Hat LLC < > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbowlerhat.dev&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Caaac0c3693294c72c62608d7cb614ad0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637201491043736972&sdata=p3GFZuKOAdosdIUUK6YQ7pyrQLAGCrdulrcyfAHUq%2FE%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020 at 9:50 AM OmPrakash Muppirala < > > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Carlos, Chris, > > > > > > There is nothing stopping you from building something from scratch. > > There > > > is no need to convince anyone. Please start committing. > > > > > > I think Alex and others have made their points clearly. I don't > see > > a > > > reason to continue rehashing the same points over and over. > > > > > > As long as the current Ant based build/release is not broken, > > everyone > > > should be happy, or at least learn to live with it. > > > > > > That said, how can I help with your effort 😊? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Om > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2020, 9:38 AM Carlos Rovira < > [email protected] > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > El mié., 18 mar. 2020 a las 17:12, Alex Harui > > (<[email protected] > > > >) > > > > escribió: > > > > > > > > > The proposal I'm seeing takes us back a few years to when > others > > > > couldn’t > > > > > create a release. > > > > > > > > > > > > As I posted in the other thread just a few minutes ago, it's not > > about to > > > > go back and coninue. Our propose is to create something new from > > scratch, > > > > so all that old problems should just gone. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Carlos Rovira > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Caaac0c3693294c72c62608d7cb614ad0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637201491043736972&sdata=N6loQSFF1p1N3AS0%2FDoObELUjgRCMV9I0ylQyuYL4Y8%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
