Hi Piotr,
I would assume that ideally you would simply do a normal Maven release.
This will produce all the artifacts needed for an official Apache release and
also create and deploy the convenience binaries for Maven.
I would then suggest to use the source-bundle and run the Ant build inside
it to produce the Ant convenience binary (SDK) from that.
Chris
Am 26.03.20, 13:43 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>:
Hi Chris,
My end expectation is that I will be able to prepare RC1 by Maven, but also
take care of ANT build - I'm not sure maybe it would be enough if ANT build
will be launched by maven and produce IDE ready SDK - which could be tested
in that way.
Thanks,
Piotr
czw., 26 mar 2020 o 13:38 Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
napisał(a):
> Hi Piotr,
>
> generally the build is currently already in a state we should be able to
> release Royale with Maven.
> I intentionally put all the bells and whistles in a profile that you need
> to activate “royale-release”.
> If you don’t do that, it should be a normal Maven release.
>
> Chris
>
> Von: Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> Antworten an: "dev@royale.apache.org" <dev@royale.apache.org>
> Datum: Donnerstag, 26. März 2020 um 12:27
> An: Apache Royale Development <dev@royale.apache.org>
> Betreff: Re: Releasing: Finally giving up
>
> 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<mailto:
> 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<mailto: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<mailto:
> aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>>:
>
>
>
> On 3/25/20, 4:46 PM, "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org<mailto:
> 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
> <mailto:carlosrov...@apache.org>>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > El mié., 25 mar. 2020 a las 21:26, Alex Harui
> > (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid<mailto: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
>
> [cid:171168797bb6addd0331]<http://www.cristallium.com/>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
>
--
Piotr Zarzycki
Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
<https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
