Seems like the simplest way.

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:55 PM Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Infra says there's nothing in-between all or nothing with github :-(
>
> So I'll probably go down the google doc route and have the text imported
> by one of you folks.
>
> Chris
>
>
> Am 28.05.20, 17:38 schrieb "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com>:
>
>     I’m going offline for two days so I’ll be quiet for a while, but it
> might be a good idea to ask infra whether they have a solution to this
> problem.
>
>     Harbs
>
>     > On May 28, 2020, at 5:36 PM, Christofer Dutz <
> christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote:
>     >
>     > Hi all,
>     >
>     > well perhaps searching for some experiences with this ...
>     > my gut-feeling would make me expect to have the wiki content
> replaced by Viagra ads ;-)
>     >
>     > But it would be in git, so easily undoable ....
>     >
>     > I did find this however:
>     >
> https://www.growingwiththeweb.com/2016/07/enabling-pull-requests-on-github-wikis.html
>     >
>     > It's less convenient way, but probably safer.
>     >
>     > Chris
>     >
>     >
>     > Am 28.05.20, 16:25 schrieb "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com>:
>     >
>     >    Hmm. That’s a problem I was not aware of...
>     >
>     >    What do folks think about enabling public editing of wikis?[1]
>     >
>     >    Harbs
>     >
>     >    [1]
> https://help.github.com/en/github/building-a-strong-community/changing-access-permissions-for-wikis
> <
> https://help.github.com/en/github/building-a-strong-community/changing-access-permissions-for-wikis
> >
>     >
>     >> On May 28, 2020, at 5:00 PM, Christofer Dutz <
> christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote:
>     >>
>     >> Hi all,
>     >>
>     >> so I just had a look ... it seems as if the "fork" feature on
> github doesn't fork the wiki too ...
>     >> So I could create my own pages, but not create PRs for
> documentation ... or I just didn't find the docs on how to do it.
>     >> Do you have any pointers for me?
>     >>
>     >> Chris
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> Am 28.05.20, 13:55 schrieb "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>:
>     >>
>     >>   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/

Reply via email to