Hi All, I'm member of Apache Foundation for quite some time now. I think I have wrote maybe 2-3 emails during that time on members mailing list. - Why? - well I'm a person which doesn't like never ending stories, stories which are not end up with consensus nor action and I'm sorry but this is how it looks like in most cases there. Here we are in Apache Royale project where this thread ended up exactly the same - never ending story. - As PMC of this project I would like to say enough! :)
I had hope that when Carlos and Chris try CI steps and in the process they may have some issues, but they will end up in the same place as I ended up where I was able to prepare RC1 in about 2h without the problem. It turns out that they end up in the place where I have started, in the place where I have spend 5-6 days of work to finally reach stable point. They ended up frustrated in the same way as I was! I really don't care now what kind of issue they have now, whether it's fixable or not - I just have enough of those never ending discussions where there is absolutely no results. I met Chris in US in Miami and I have spend with him best time ever, he is really great developer - if he is saying that he will have release process in 3-4 steps on my machine - I'm +1 make it so. Not tomorrow, not in a week - start today! Please start whole work on that and make it happen. I will be the first who try the process and maybe with Chris's help we will solve also issue with uploading artifacts to staging area which we had. Good Luck, Piotr czw., 26 mar 2020 o 12:02 <cont...@cristallium.com> napisał(a): > Hi Guys, > > I'm a lover of Flex dev guy since more than 10 years, been members of Flex > group on Montpellier (France) at golden age of Flex and go at all conferences > when Michaël Chaize came to Montpellier (and using Flex every day). > > First of all I want to thank every one of you for your hard work, and > congratulate you for the actual Apache Royale capabilities. > With the last features (especialy datagrid), today your great work make > possible to use Apache Royale in business application. Of course, there are > bugs, but when reported, it's quickly fix, this is great. > > Now, this is a huge opportunity but also risk for all guys like me to adop > Apache Royale for futur projects or use it instead of using Air when it's > possible. > Personnaly, I first use it on my own Webs applications and perhaps for my > customers on little applications for the begin. My big enormous worry is to > use it and be alone in front of a SDK bug. > Seeing new release every 1 or 2 months should certainly reassure me. For now > I see SDK 0.9.7 since a lot of time and this make me affraid and I don't > understand why there is no 0.9.8. > > I'm speaking as an Apache Royale SDK user : I'm very sad to read these > debates on the subject of tools to use for making release. I don't care about > tools nedeed or not to build the release SDK. > I would like use Apache Royale to build RAD (Rapid Application Dev) Web > applications and see more and more SDK features added, and participate to > project (like today) by reporting bug by using my time on isolate the bug > and make tests cases with screenshoots to save your time in fixing it. > > Using Reac, Bootstrap, AngularJS or other similar is a back to 80's. How can > I explain my customer that I need 3 ou 4 days to make thinks that took me 1 > day with Flex ? > The big competitive advantage of Apache Royale is not only be able to re-use > Flex apps but is also simplicity and time saving where other SDK can't do it. > (I think you already know that) > > I am convinced that all guys like me will jump using Royale when they will > know that there is a bug free SDK with fast evolution available. (unfortunaly > it's not known enough, nobody know someone working in newspapers ?) > > So please, I beg you, don't waste your time on things that are not essential > and like Carlos said, go forward. From outside view, Apache Royale stay > sticky to 0.9.7. > > You are so close of a v1.0, I hope see it very soon and other releases with > bugs fix every 1, 2 or 3 months. > Consider my comments as support and not criticism. > > Thanks again for your hard work. > > Long life and success to Apache Royale ! > > Fred > > > > Le 26.03.2020 09:26, Carlos Rovira a écrit : > > Hi, > > that's amazingly simple, so I think we should go that way without doubt. I > think reached this point there's a clear sense of that we need to go that > route. > > We tried our best to stick with the previous process and we're all > loosing lots of time. Then currently seems no more people in the community > was interested in this thread, event to comment a single line (here or in > the other users list thread), what means that or there's no more people > like us in this project or people really is not interested and just want us > to release and go forward. > > As previously I think most of the PMCs here (Om, Josh, Greg and me for > sure), probably Yishay for his concise comments are more for this. > My thinking is that the right now I think only 2 PMCs are for CI Server, > and other one that is uncertainly but didn't try the CI Server. > > I think all can live together while is not a must for the rest that don't > want it the others option, so what's about if we release with the > super-simple steps Chris proposal, and others wanting to use CI do that > when is their RM turn ? (of course maintaining it and making it work for > his release without requiring nothing for the rest that doesn't want it). > > Release as other projects do is recommended but not required, the same as > the actual CI server (but this one should be less recommended since is a > royale-only practice not seen in any other place). > > What's the important thing is to release, do it, and do it easily and > often. > > Thanks > > > > El jue., 26 mar. 2020 a las 8:24, Christofer Dutz (< > christofer.d...@c-ware.de>) escribió: > > Ok, > > I'll write this a last time as I do feel like we're going in circles and > will from now on not participate in any discussion involving releasing on a > CI server. > > A correct Maven release would use (There will be some additional profiles > to activate to include all modules) > > 1) the "mvn release:branch" call in order to create the branch and bump > the version of develop to the next version. > 2) the "mvn release:prepare" to change the pom to the release version, set > the timestamp in the pom (for reproducible builds) build ... if all tests > are good, commit the changes, tag this commit, update the poms to the next > development version, commit those changes and push everything. > 3) the "mvn release:perform" which will checkout the tagged version build > everything with the "apache-release" profile turned on (Which causes the > source.jars, Javadoc.jars, hashes and gpg singatures to be created as well > as the assembly) This also deploys the built artifacts to Nexus. > > Most of that you are already doing on the CI server however you're not > letting it do all automatically (For lack of credentials) > > But ... if you would just be doing those steps on the RM machine. > > Chris > > > > > > Am 26.03.20, 05:54 schrieb "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>: > > > > On 3/25/20, 4:46 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: > > > What I want to know is what the Maven commands should be to > create a > > release in this "conventional process" you are referring to. > > > > If you want to know what's the conventional maven process is, I > think I can > ask Chris if he wants to work with me on that process, since he > already did > many other Apache projects, we can expect the process is what is > needed for > us to. But just expect that will be a series of standard maven > commands > (prepare, release,...), so nothing strange at all (I expect). > > Do you want us to do that? > > Yes. I want to know what the series of standard Maven commands are. > Then we can figure out how to convert them to run on the CI server. > > -Alex > > Thanks > > > > > > Maybe someone else can explain better than me. > > > > -Alex > > > > On 3/25/20, 2:22 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > El mié., 25 mar. 2020 a las 21:26, Alex Harui > > (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) > > escribió: > > > > > Carlos, > > > > > > I'm pretty sure that part of the "conventional process" > you want to > > try > > > requires filling the staging repo from a local machine. > > > > > > > This is what we already did. If you go to [1] will see [2]. > That was > > the > > upload of compiler to the staging repo. When trying to do > the same for > > typedefs it failed when trying to fill repo from local > machine. I think > > Chris or I should not take more time in trying to fix Ant > scripts that > > are > > failing. > > > > Thanks > > > > [1] > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frepository.apache.org%2F%23stagingRepositories&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C821c810ff88f4f3371a608d7d116c8e0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637207768101866118&sdata=qSFTmdvxYB8fK%2FKM5kAd%2Bzslsl0fNxUJi%2BybUIleIUY%3D&reserved=0 > > [2] > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2Fw4az7pD&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C821c810ff88f4f3371a608d7d116c8e0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637207768101866118&sdata=mOv7%2BFzO764iEkXZgA3DiGEdeRaXQrLp%2Fgq8g%2BOkjt0%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Carlos Rovira > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C821c810ff88f4f3371a608d7d116c8e0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637207768101866118&sdata=96pUSZqS1Sc%2FJ4%2BvUUIFpcKEW4b2DAj2FJjCvc9eW2k%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C821c810ff88f4f3371a608d7d116c8e0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637207768101866118&sdata=96pUSZqS1Sc%2FJ4%2BvUUIFpcKEW4b2DAj2FJjCvc9eW2k%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > -- > > Frédéric Gilli > > mob.0668542622 > > http://www.cristallium.com > > <http://www.cristallium.com> > > > > -- Piotr Zarzycki Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
