There were issues identified with the original process as Chris and Carlos worked through it that prevented them from completing it. Exposing any problems in that itself is helpful, but I also observed that it was a very frustrating discovery by Chris and Carlos, and we should be thankful it is now known.
-The timestamp issue. Alex, you already suggested this was perhaps an issue with the original process, and we are waiting to see if DST alignment is the 'fix' (if it is, it still needs a real fix, we all agree). -Chris mentioned that the compiler output is also inconsistent which makes binary reproducibles a problem in the swf part of swcs. Perhaps there are some settings for this that are not apparent to address it. In a swc, the xml content/ordering seems to match which also corresponds to classes being output in the same order in the bytecode of the swf content. But the class members inside the bytecode for each class can be in a different order. -there were also differences in the actual content between CI server and local for nodejs externs, for unknown reasons If there are indeed problems with the 'standard' against which the alternative needs to be assessed then nobody is 'on the hook' or 'off the hook'. So far it just means the starting point does not seem to be a reliable reference implementation to attempt to match in the first place. Let's focus on fixing that. On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 8:48 AM Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Alex and Yishay, > > as compiler-build-tools is released (hope others will have the time to test > and vote it soon), let me know if I finally start 0.9.7. > I'll be ok with whatever you decided. > > Thanks! :) > > Carlos > > > > El dom., 29 mar. 2020 a las 21:43, Alex Harui (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) > escribió: > > > I share your concern with the precedent being set here. I don't think > the > > folks behind these changes should be off the hook for getting the CI > steps > > to work again. Otherwise, any of us can go break stuff under the > rationale > > of making something else better and let someone else deal with the mess. > > > > Still, certain things have to be done. I think there is consensus that a > > release should be doable on a local machine or the CI server. So, > > hopefully Carlos is off to not just create an RC, but also document the > > steps required to do this end-to-end on a local machine by actually doing > > it. That made sense while waiting for Sunday to roll around to see if > that > > gets past the timestamp issue in the SWCs. > > > > If you have time to tweak the CI steps and see if they work to help get > > them working again, feel free to do so. I will hopefully have cycles to > > help. The credentials are in the private@ archives. I recommend > > creating a completely new set of steps by cloning the old jobs as needed. > > For example we won't need the 1a (utils) step (or probably the other > utils > > steps) anymore. A differently named step or two is needed to match what > > Carlos did for the compiler-build-tools release. > > > > If you can help them resolve the SWC timestamp issue, I hope to see the > > folks who committed to restoring these steps back to working order will > > complete that task. > > > > My 2 cents, > > -Alex > > > > On 3/29/20, 10:43 AM, "Yishay Weiss" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > I guess I misunderstood. I thought we were only talking about the > > compiler-build-tools release. > > > > Carlos, I of course don’t mind you doing the work. I have plenty on > my > > plate. I’m concerned with the process. Although I haven’t been following > > the threads closely enough to understand the whole technical debate, I > did > > understand that Alex and others have expressed reservations (e.g. should > > the release actually use ant to verify the ant build). Has this debate > > reached a conclusion that enjoys a consensus? If not, there should > probably > > be a vote. I don’t want to encourage a dynamic where debates are won by > > unilateral action. > > > > If everyone feels comfortable with Carlos releasing with mvn, then I > > won’t object. If there are reservations then I’d still like to give it > > another week, and see if an RM newbie like me can apply the process > > suggested by Alex. > > > > Thanks. > > > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrov...@apache.org> > > Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2020 7:34 PM > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: Releasing: Finally giving up > > > > Hi Yishay, > > > > I think we were all in agreement so I'll make the release. Right now > > we're > > voting the compiler-build-tools 1.2.0 release > > As soon as this is approved, I'll continue withe 0.9.7 release. > > > > compiler build tools 1.2.0 is done to release some small changes for > > reproducible builds and check the optional path about to release > > compiler > > build tools or jburg versions in the future (that should be very > rare). > > > > Thanks > > > > > > El dom., 29 mar. 2020 a las 15:59, Yishay Weiss (< > > yishayj...@hotmail.com>) > > escribió: > > > > > Ok, I’m ready. What’s next? Do I need to cancel an RC? How do I > > login to > > > Jenkins? Where do I start? > > > > > > From: Alex Harui<mailto:aha...@adobe.com> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 8:50 PM > > > To: dev@royale.apache.org<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org>; Yishay > > > Weiss<mailto:yishayj...@hotmail.com> > > > Subject: Re: Releasing: Finally giving up > > > > > > @Yishay Weiss > > > > > > Let's wait until the set of Maven steps are available from Chris > and > > > Carlos. Then I will try to find some cycles to help you. Because > > of where > > > I live, where the schools are closed, and my kids schedule, I have > > good > > > weeks and bad weeks for having time for work, so it will be best to > > wait to > > > try a release until we have the steps and it is one of my good > weeks > > (next > > > good week starts this Friday at 5pm my time). > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -Alex > > > > > > On 3/26/20, 5:13 AM, "Yishay Weiss" <yishayj...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > I too, feel very uncomfortable participating in these threads. > > While > > > grateful to Carlos and Chris for their work I’m very annoyed with > > the tone > > > of ultimatums and doom and gloom. Alex has put in a lot of work > into > > this > > > and I trust his concerns are technical, rather than protecting his > > ego as > > > has been suggested. We need to get this discussion back on > technical > > tracks. > > > > > > Since Chris has given up, and it looks like Carlos has as > well, I > > > volunteer to start the release process from scratch next Sunday, > > which is > > > after Israel has switched to day light saving. I will try to do the > > process > > > incrementally and in parallel to my other tasks. If by the end of > > the week > > > it turns out the process is too cumbersome and cannot realistically > > be made > > > to work smoothly I will be in favor of changing the requirements to > > enable > > > Chris’s mvn setup to be the main release tool. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Yishay > > > > > > From: Piotr Zarzycki<mailto:piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 1:27 PM > > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> > > > Subject: 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%7C875a5f578f66433d903f08d7d408a03e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637211005840951898&sdata=U8BmlIdd6ZajuOEn1jNCWlrJbAn%2BV1BQbwhsXkRc854%3D&reserved=0 > > > > [2] > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2Fw4az7pD&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C875a5f578f66433d903f08d7d408a03e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637211005840951898&sdata=PKLdBG1DimNg3wANGcs3cTfiR3nelEed1tBZM%2FvVU%2Bk%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Carlos Rovira > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C875a5f578f66433d903f08d7d408a03e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637211005840951898&sdata=3uxFi47xpWG7B3m7OF%2FqniyK7yb3uUDZD4CCgaUtwPM%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Carlos Rovira > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C875a5f578f66433d903f08d7d408a03e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637211005840961853&sdata=xtI3M5bsNTrNr5pz7b7cDKaWaqkcbLGrcovspTCH8xk%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Frédéric Gilli > > > > > > mob.0668542622 > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cristallium.com&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C875a5f578f66433d903f08d7d408a03e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637211005840961853&sdata=FmIv8VzENVjH8Lbe%2FYiZb%2BtripSYb5JG%2F5hdWvnVW9M%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > [cid:171168797bb6addd0331]< > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cristallium.com&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C875a5f578f66433d903f08d7d408a03e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637211005840961853&sdata=FmIv8VzENVjH8Lbe%2FYiZb%2BtripSYb5JG%2F5hdWvnVW9M%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > > > > > Patreon: > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C875a5f578f66433d903f08d7d408a03e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637211005840961853&sdata=xF1gfNEs6uwJ3oyQ%2BdzA4PJ0eB%2BcGmaBBvas8KVYk9c%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C875a5f578f66433d903f08d7d408a03e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637211005840961853&sdata=xtI3M5bsNTrNr5pz7b7cDKaWaqkcbLGrcovspTCH8xk%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira >
