Oh, of course! Chris, I am trying to move up to the website stuff that Royale users would want quick access to, and keep on the wiki stuff that the development team needs, or that is "tl:dr" details. I would be happy to work with you to get your material on the github wiki and to curate it so it appears where we all can find it. This is what I do for the Infrastructure team at ASF, who had a backlog of 20 years of material with nobody curating it.
As you probably know, the patterns for the two wikis are very similar. Andrew On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 8:55 AM Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> wrote: > Chris, > > We are not using confluence at all. We are using Wiki [1], but you can > write document in whatever place you wanted to if you are not comfortable > with wiki. > > Andrew, > > Will you be willing to translate that document into our Wiki manner ? > > [1] https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/wiki > > Thanks, > Piotr > > czw., 28 maj 2020 o 13:43 Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > napisał(a): > > > Hi Piotr, > > > > I think the Royale project could grant my user write permissions to > > confluence. > > Then I could write such a document there. > > > > But I could also do a google doc outside, if this is more convenient. > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > Am 28.05.20, 13:39 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com > >: > > > > Chris, > > > > I think I would like to be after Harbs and eventually Greg. Yes you > can > > send me a link, write a document with absolutely EVERY step which I > > have to > > do in order to get release done. Even if you think that I know some > > steps > > like signing - you can in such places point into some existing > > document. > > > > I would like to be able to comment on every step to confront if I > > really > > for example had to copy/paste some command or just opposite I had to > do > > much more than only copy/paste. > > > > Thanks, > > Piotr > > > > czw., 28 maj 2020 o 13:27 Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de > > > > napisał(a): > > > > > Hi Piotr, > > > > > > we could change the configuration to use the jgit plugin on the CI > > machine > > > and to use the default on local machines. > > > In that case you could do it on any machine you want (also windows) > > > > > > Who does releases in which order using which tooling ... I don't > > really > > > care ... > > > > > > I'm just happy that there's a line building up of people wanting to > > do so > > > and I get to use fresh releases :-) > > > > > > If there is anything I can help with ... just ping me and I'll be > > happy to > > > help. > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 28.05.20, 13:18 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" < > > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > Hi Harbs, > > > > > > I would like to be a release manager as well, but using Chri's > > > implementation which as far as I know is in place. I would like > > to use > > > his > > > mentioned 3 steps and see how much things I will have to do on > > my own > > > to > > > make release happen. I know that I will have to do that on Mac, > > cause > > > there > > > some Maven/Git/Jenkins related plugin which allows use Jenkins, > > but it > > > prevents me from pushing artifacts from windows. > > > > > > I have some thoughts about above proposition, but I will wait > > till we > > > all > > > pass trough the release process. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Piotr > > > > > > czw., 28 maj 2020 o 11:06 Christofer Dutz < > > christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > > napisał(a): > > > > > > > Hi Harbs, > > > > > > > > makes sense. > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Am 28.05.20, 10:48 schrieb "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > > Hi Chris, > > > > > > > > Thanks for you work helping with the 0.9.7 release as > well. > > > > > > > > I’m definitely open to improving the structure and the > > process. > > > > > > > > My biggest hesitation is that I don’t understand the > > current > > > release > > > > process well enough. Until recently Alex was the only one who > > really > > > > understood it. Yishay just went through the process so he has > > a good > > > > understanding now. I plan on doing another release the week > > > following next > > > > (i.e. starting June 7 or so). My hope is that I will > > understand it > > > better > > > > at that point. I don’t know whether Greg Dove is willing to > do > > a > > > release, > > > > but I think it would be very valuable to get his input as > well. > > > > > > > > So my proposal is that we get some more of us familiar > > with the > > > what > > > > and the why of the current process. I want to understand what > > was > > > done and > > > > why it was done. I don’t feel comfortable having an opinion > on > > > changing > > > > things until I can weigh the pros and cons. I’d like more of > > us to > > > be in > > > > the same position so we will be in the position of building > > > consensus on > > > > changes. The reason I hope that Greg Dove specifically does a > > > release is > > > > because I feel he’s pretty neutral on technology and I think > > he’ll > > > have > > > > good valuable input. > > > > > > > > So here’s my proposal: > > > > > > > > 1. Let’s work on doing another 2-3 releases in rapid > > succession > > > > without making too many changes. > > > > 2. Let’s try and get as many of us familiar with that > > process as > > > > possible. > > > > 3. Once that’s done, let’s discuss the pain points and > > what can > > > be > > > > done to improve the structure and/or the process with pros > and > > cons. > > > Maybe > > > > your suggestion is the way to go? Maybe something else? > > Similar? > > > Don’t > > > > know, but I’d like to get to the point where we can have an > > > intelligent > > > > discussion on the topic with different points of view. I > don’t > > think > > > we’re > > > > quite there yet. > > > > 4. Carefully start implementing changes. Making big > > changes is > > > often > > > > disruptive and is often the cause of conflict. This is > nothing > > > specific to > > > > us, and there’s even accepted advice on the topic. I suggest > > we all > > > read > > > > and follow James Duncan Davidson's “rules for > > revolutionaries”[1]. > > > > > > > > I appreciate having your proposed changes to ponder the > > next > > > couple of > > > > weeks. > > > > > > > > In the meantime, please by all means, dive into Royale > and > > create > > > > issues, pull requests, let us know difficulties, etc. I’ll > > make my > > > best > > > > effort to be as responsive as possible and help where I can. > If > > > you’re > > > > feeling frustration, please reach out to me on Slack. > > > > > > > > Does this make sense? > > > > Harbs > > > > > > > > [1]http://s.apache.org/rules_for_revolutionaries < > > > > http://s.apache.org/rules_for_revolutionaries> > > > > > > > > > On May 28, 2020, at 10:56 AM, Christofer Dutz < > > > > christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > congrats to the successful release of 0.9.7 … it > greatly > > > simplified > > > > the last PLC4X release to have the artifacts out there in the > > wild. > > > > > > > > > > I would really like to see Royale as the tool in my > > toolbox for > > > > building industrial UI applications as I sort of am not that > > happy > > > with the > > > > other existing alternatives. > > > > > > > > > > In order to do this I know that I have some areas of > > expertise > > > I can > > > > offer to the project … Writing ActionScript and MXML code is > > > definitely not > > > > where I can help best. > > > > > > > > > > However I’m really good at Java, Maven and Apache > > > Infrastructure. I > > > > know that development is most active in the ASJS repo but I > > would be > > > happy > > > > to help on the other sides ... perhaps even help the > automated > > > testing in > > > > the ASJS repo. > > > > > > > > > > I would have one proposal on how to really simplify > > things, > > > but I > > > > would be hesitant to start working on this before we have > > consensus > > > on this > > > > here. > > > > > It would probably involve multiple weeks of full time > > work in > > > total > > > > to do it for me, but I would be happy to do it, if the > project > > would > > > accept > > > > it in the end and you folks would be willing to help with the > > parts > > > I’m not > > > > too deep into (Ant-, NPM build adjustments). So that’s why > I’m > > > bringing > > > > this up here first. I know it might question some unwritten > > project > > > rules, > > > > but I would kindly ask you to not just block the discussion > and > > > perhaps > > > > help re-evaluating why they became “project rules” and if the > > > assumptions > > > > were correct or still apply. > > > > > > > > > > The benefit would be: > > > > > > > > > > * Less problems in getting set-up (just clone one > > repo) > > > > > * Simpler release (Only need to release one > > repository … no > > > > updating of version information in-between) > > > > > * Less things that can go wrong (I remember when > > compiler > > > was > > > > already in 0.9.8-SNAPSHOT but the rest wasn’t yet … there > were > > issues > > > > discussed on the list) > > > > > * I would use the opportunity to clean up some > things > > in the > > > > maven build, because despite the probably common assumption … > > I’m not > > > > really happy with the usability of the maven build from a > > user’s > > > > perspective … I think there’s great room for improvement > > > > > > > > > > In general I would propose to merge all 3 repositories > > into > > > one. > > > > Right now the Maven build would probably work with different > > > releases of > > > > the compiler or typedefs but from what I can see … the Ant > > release > > > would > > > > probably not work without modification. So the whole idea of > > > releasing > > > > separately seems to be more a theoretical one. I think in the > > > history of > > > > FlexJS and Royale it hasn’t been done once (please correct me > > if I’m > > > > wrong). If there are external entities only interested in > > consuming > > > parts > > > > of the project, we could build source distribution for these > > that > > > only > > > > contain the parts they are interest in. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * I propose to move the artifacts needed for the > > build but > > > not > > > > being part of the build (build-tools, jburg-types) into a > > separate > > > > repository where they can be released independently and don’t > > cause > > > > confusion like they are doing right now. > > > > > * Then I would like to create a new repository > (Let’s > > call > > > it > > > > “royale”) which contains 3 directories: compiler, typedefs > and > > asjs > > > (or > > > > even with the current “royale-“ prefix, I don’t really > > care/mind). > > > > > * Now comes the biggest block … I would need to > > completely > > > > rewrite the royale-maven-plugin … the core of it would be > also > > moved > > > to the > > > > new build-tools repository. This plugin would sort of be an > > empty > > > skeleton > > > > to load compiler plugins. This is needed as Maven can’t > build a > > > project > > > > where a plugin used in the project is also part of the build > > itself. > > > So we > > > > couldn’t build all-in-one go without this change. > > > > > * Next step would be to add a new royale-parent pom > > in the > > > new > > > > root of the project, the 3 old parents would be updated to > use > > the > > > new > > > > parent and a lot of duplicated configuration could be moved > > there, > > > hereby > > > > greatly simplifying the 3 old root poms. > > > > > > > > > > A migration plan, could be to : > > > > > > > > > > * create a feature-branch in all 3 repositories > > > > > * create two new repos “royale” and > > “royale-build-tools” (or > > > > whatever you want to name them) > > > > > * Start with using git submodules to import the 3 > > branches > > > into > > > > the new (I know submodules really suck, but they would only > be > > > needed until > > > > everything is finished) > > > > > * I would move/copy the build tools to the new repo > > and > > > start > > > > working on the new maven plugin > > > > > * Then I would need to update the old compiler repo > to > > > produce > > > > something I can use as royale-maven-plugin plugins > > > > > * After that’s done I would update the typedefs to > > use the > > > new > > > > plugin > > > > > * After that’s done I would update the asjs repo to > > use the > > > new > > > > plugin > > > > > * Then I would add the new royale-parent pom > > > > > * After that’s done I would simplify and deduplicate > > the > > > > configuration > > > > > * Now I would definitely need some help with > > adjusting the > > > Ant > > > > and possibly NPM build to these changes (Most of them should > be > > > > profile-names and maybe directory names or paths) > > > > > * The last thing that would be required to be done > now > > > would be > > > > to remove the submodules in the “royale” repository and to > > import > > > the real > > > > repos > > > > > * After this the 3 old repos could be archived > > > > > > > > > > I am really looking forward to some open discussion on > > this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > > > > > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > > > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > > > > > > -- > > Piotr Zarzycki > > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>* > -- Andrew Wetmore http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
