IMO, examples that use versions not in dependencies and where Maven knows to
replace should use the ${royale.framework.version} property. It is much easier
to update that one property than to find all the other properties in the poms.
My 2 cents,
-Alex
On 5/10/20, 12:02 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
about the TDJ issue. I checked and I think the solution is, if maven can’t
see some snapshots itself automatically, we need to do a search and replace
to remove “-SNAPSHOT” left in pom configs and go with the released
artifacts.
It's clear the problem is TDJ is using in the pom the snapshot version
instead the released one.
I think as well this is not something that should prevent us from release.
We're still under 1.0, and our mission is to continue improving rather than
stop for something so little like this problem.
just my 2
El dom., 10 may. 2020 a las 3:21, Alex Harui (<[email protected]>)
escribió:
> We definitely should try to prevent these problems, but the responsibility
> for fixing it and preventing it in the future is not the RMs, it is the
all
> of our responsibility. So if you can think of a way to clear snapshots,
> add it to the approval script. If you can think of a way to scan poms for
> -SNAPSHOT, add that too, although we currently do use a few snapshots as
> build tools. I haven't looked at the pom for TDJ but it could be that it
> should not use explicit versions but rather, a property that is set by the
> 13 steps. The online release notes may need to be created in the wiki.
> Feel free to pitch in and do that, and add whatever you think will help
our
> users.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 5/9/20, 3:49 PM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Thanks, I generally agree with that, although I don't think it should
> ever
> be an excuse for avoiding improvements to enhance quality in the
> future,
> and we should make sure we avoid this specifically in the future.
> Nothing is perfect, software development is not particularly unique in
> that
> regard. But we can assure 'quality' if we have specific standards to
> meet.
> So hopefully it makes sense that ensuring that all examples build
> (same as
> CI) for future releases makes sense.
>
> So I will apply the same approach as you for now and vote EOD my time
> after
> a few more checks.
> I don't know if there is a 'fix' for this for the future, unless the
13
> steps 'automate' the search and replace in pom files for version
> 'SNAPSHOT'
> and for some reason this part is being skipped. Otherwise if it is a
> manual
> 'search-and-replace in files' step, then it is probably just
> something to
> note for the next release.
> Perhaps the approve script can be set to clear the snapshots from
> local m2
> so we always trap this early?
>
> Maybe for this release, the 'fix' can go in as advice in the
> post-release
> release notes? With or without a patch (I have one - I was able to
> complete
> the ApproveRoyale script after fixing the pom file).
> Also hopefully we can get to 0.9.8 quickly, which should be possible
> now
> with all the work that has been put into the release process, that
> definitely limits the impact of something like this.
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 8:14 AM Alex Harui <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > I voted +1 because the default build scripts for our repos do not
> build
> > examples. Most of the examples do build. Please fix or file bugs
> for the
> > problems you found. I'm sure other bugs will eventually be found
and
> > filed. The release does not have to be perfect.
> >
> > I also voted +1 because, despite the problems reported so far, it is
> my
> > opinion that the project and community are better off having this
> package
> > as its official release instead of having PMC members spend more
> energy on
> > the release instead of features and fixes our users really need.
> There
> > appear to be simple workarounds for the problems reported.
> >
> > I don't think there are any absolute definitions. It is often a
> judgement
> > call since software is rarely perfect.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 5/9/20, 12:56 PM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for confirming that.
> > So what does that mean in terms of our standards for release?
> How do I
> > apply the rules for assessing things here?
> >
> > Can I understand clarity about this wording:
> >
> > At a minimum you would be expected to check that:
> > ....
> > - That the build script completes successfully
> > - That you can compile and crosscompile a simple example using
> the SDK.
> >
> >
> > I realise that this is a configuration issue with the build of
> one
> > example
> > only. I feel comfortable that the framework part is building ok
> and
> > although I did not check with outside projects, I tested a few
of
> > the built examples, and those that built (that I tested) were
> fine.
> >
> > I guess it comes down to: does the 'build script' referred to
> above
> > include
> > the examples or not? If the 'build script' includes the
> examples, (as
> > it
> > does in CI build), then I cannot in good conscience agree that
it
> > 'completes successfully'.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 6:17 PM Alex Harui
> <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I flushed my snapshots and TDJ didn't build.
> > >
> > > On 5/8/20, 10:49 PM, "Alex Harui" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > You're probably right. I haven't tested if it would build
> if I
> > > flushed all snapshots from my local repo.
> > >
> > > IMO, something to fix for the next release.
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 5/8/20, 10:01 PM, "Greg Dove" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Actually looking at the pom for TDJ, there is a
> > >
> > > <id>copy-themes</id>
> > > <phase>generate-resources</phase>
> > > <goals>
> > > <goal>unpack</goal>
> > > </goals>
> > >
> > > which looks like it is set up for snapshot versions of
> > themes to be
> > > unpacked.
> > >
> > > <version>0.9.7-SNAPSHOT</version>
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't know if this is a problem or not (or the cause
> of the
> > > other problem
> > > I am seeing or not).
> > >
> > > Appreciate any guidance....
> > > Thanks,
> > > Greg
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 4:46 PM Greg Dove <
> > [email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Alex, Yishay, I tried today as well.
> > > >
> > > > FWIW I was able to get the js version to work, and
> > complete the
> > > > ApproveRoyale sequence for that.
> > > >
> > > > I tried the use-flash variation 3 tiimes so far, and
> did
> > not
> > > complete
> > > > it, so keen to find out what I am doing wrong.
> > > > I am using the same environment variables
> configuration
> > that I
> > > used daily
> > > > for regular builds.
> > > > Everything works through to TourDeJewel, at which
> point it
> > hangs
> > > in the
> > > > compilation of the app.
> > > >
> > > > Prior to that I am seeing things that I don't
> (believe I)
> > > normally see for
> > > > all of the Jewel theme prior to the TDJ compilation:
> > > >
> > > > [WARNING] Could not transfer metadata
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
org.apache.royale.framework:Jewel-Light-NoFlat-Primary-Orange-Theme:0.9.7-SNAPSHOT/maven-metadata.xml
> > > > from/to apache.snapshots (
> > >
> >
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frepository.apache.org%2Fsnapshots&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522578042&sdata=I8iKMBFU01%2BPmaIucm7NvVlZwRXJPS9uXHDHZsO3%2Fns%3D&reserved=0
> > > ):
> > > > Failed to transfer file:
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frepository.apache.org%2Fsnapshots%2Forg%2Fapache%2Froyale%2Fframework%2FJewel-Light-NoFlat-Primary-Orange-Theme%2F0.9.7-SNAPSHOT%2Fmaven-metadata.xml&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522588042&sdata=FNdN8b3DkU0Q2aToJiOqlWgm5EWsEeKslRt13e5Oib8%3D&reserved=0
> > > .
> > > > Return code is: 500 , ReasonPhrase:Server Error.
> > > > [WARNING] Failure to transfer
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
org.apache.royale.framework:Jewel-Light-NoFlat-Primary-Orange-Theme:0.9.7-SNAPSHOT/maven-metadata.xml
> > > > from
> > >
> >
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frepository.apache.org%2Fsnapshots&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522588042&sdata=K05UBEg4hNlLUvdnbQQ%2BZ1Jp59%2FV40mDJ%2B7dpRflviU%3D&reserved=0
> > > was cached in the local
> > > > repository, resolution will not be reattempted until
> the
> > update
> > > interval of
> > > > apache.snapshots has elapsed or updates are forced.
> > Original
> > > error: Could
> > > > not transfer metadata
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
org.apache.royale.framework:Jewel-Light-NoFlat-Primary-Orange-Theme:0.9.7-SNAPSHOT/maven-metadata.xml
> > > > from/to apache.snapshots (
> > >
> >
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frepository.apache.org%2Fsnapshots&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522588042&sdata=K05UBEg4hNlLUvdnbQQ%2BZ1Jp59%2FV40mDJ%2B7dpRflviU%3D&reserved=0
> > > ):
> > > > Failed to transfer file:
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frepository.apache.org%2Fsnapshots%2Forg%2Fapache%2Froyale%2Fframework%2FJewel-Light-NoFlat-Primary-Orange-Theme%2F0.9.7-SNAPSHOT%2Fmaven-metadata.xml&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522588042&sdata=FNdN8b3DkU0Q2aToJiOqlWgm5EWsEeKslRt13e5Oib8%3D&reserved=0
> > > .
> > > > Return code is: 500 , ReasonPhrase:Server Error.
> > > > [INFO] Configured Artifact:
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
org.apache.royale.framework:Jewel-Light-NoFlat-Primary-Red-Theme:js:0.9.7-SNAPSHOT:swc
> > > > [INFO] Configured Artifact:
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
org.apache.royale.framework:Jewel-Light-NoFlat-Primary-Sapphire-Theme:js:0.9.7-SNAPSHOT:swc
> > > >
> > > > I don't understand why it is trying to load snapshot
> > versions of
> > > the
> > > > themes, or what is going on here. or even if that is
> > causing the
> > > problem
> > > > later with the TDJ compilation or not.
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone have any clues?
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 6:31 AM Alex Harui
> > > <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Carlos,
> > > >>
> > > >> What scenario are you testing? If you are using "
> > > -Duse-flash=true" then
> > > >> is PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME and other environment variable
> set up
> > > properly?
> > > >>
> > > >> -Alex
> > > >>
> > > >> On 5/8/20, 10:21 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > [email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> I had a similar experience with approve xml, so
> I'll
> > check
> > > as I have
> > > >> more
> > > >> time during weekend in other way:
> > > >>
> > > >> build_example.compile:
> > > >>
> > > >> Compiling Ace.swf
> > > >>
> > > >> ROYALE_HOME:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs
> > > >>
> > > >> ROYALE_COMPILER_HOME:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/js
> > > >>
> > > >> GOOG_HOME:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/js/lib/google/closure-library
> > > >>
> > > >> MXMLJSC
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
-load-config+=/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/examples/royale/Ace/src/main/config/compile-app-config.xml
> > > >>
> > > >> +playerglobal.version=11.1
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > +env.PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME=/Users/carlosrovira/Dev/Flash/Player
> > > >>
> > > >> -compiler.debug=true
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
+royalelib=/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/frameworks/
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
-closure-lib=/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/js/lib/google/closure-library
> > > >>
> > > >> +configname=royale
> > > >>
> > > >> -swf-version
> > > >>
> > > >> 14
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
-output=/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/examples/royale/Ace/bin-debug/Ace.swf
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/examples/royale/Ace/src/main/royale/Ace.mxml
> > > >>
> > > >> 0.655243136 seconds
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/frameworks/royale-config.xml(74):
> > > >> col: 0 Error: unable to open
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
'/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/frameworks/libs/player/11.1/playerglobal.swc'.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/frameworks/royale-config.xml
> > > >> (line: 74)
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> </external-library-path>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> BUILD FAILED
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> /Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/ApproveRoyale.xml:781:
> > The
> > > >> following error occurred while executing this
> line:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/build.xml:659:
> > > >> The following error occurred while executing
> this
> > line:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/examples/build.xml:77:
> > > >> The following error occurred while executing
> this
> > line:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
/Users/carlosrovira/Downloads/royale097rc5/apache-royale-0.9.7-src/royale-asjs/examples/build_example.xml:157:
> > > >> mxmlc task failed.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Total time: 6 minutes 44 seconds
> > > >>
> > > >> El vie., 8 may. 2020 a las 13:44, Yishay Weiss
> (<
> > > >> [email protected]>)
> > > >> escribió:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Rc4 had an xml bug, rc3 couldn’t build maven
> from
> > > distribution
> > > >> sources. I
> > > >> > tested ApproveRoyale.xml and it worked for me
> for
> > this
> > > release.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > From: Piotr Zarzycki<mailto:
> > [email protected]>
> > > >> > Sent: Friday, May 8, 2020 2:40 PM
> > > >> > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:
> > > [email protected]>
> > > >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache
> > Royale 0.9.7
> > > >> >
> > > >> > What are the changes in comparison to the
> previous
> > RC? I'm
> > > >> interested
> > > >> > whether I can use ApproveRoyale.xml
> > > >> > <
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Froyale%2F0.9.7%2Frc5%2FApproveRoyale.xml&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522588042&sdata=OMQtz0oBTVDGpbnFFjGZBAzG%2FXHNhkG%2FwSBasUAjJ54%3D&reserved=0
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > script
> > > >> > ?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > pt., 8 maj 2020 o 13:29 <
> [email protected]>
> > > napisał(a):
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Thanks,
> > > >> > > Yishay Weiss
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Piotr Zarzycki
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Patreon: *
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522588042&sdata=YdWgA8sSmSuhMcKoARfbTCOm6rDt8XcZgllz%2B8izpxk%3D&reserved=0
> > > >> > <
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522588042&sdata=YdWgA8sSmSuhMcKoARfbTCOm6rDt8XcZgllz%2B8izpxk%3D&reserved=0
> > > >> >*
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Carlos Rovira
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522588042&sdata=HyHxXk5Y60v2oLfpGU7KXpkWL7lNSYwxIXgJ%2FubU42w%3D&reserved=0
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cf8284f586e1246a31bf008d7f4b01a96%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637246909522598031&sdata=ofE%2F1K2zAJZVkPFEBDF7UA7HaRGCfP8FTp1jw473db8%3D&reserved=0
