Ok I seem to have tracked the issue down to actually the execution of the reproducible-maven-plugin. If I remove that the problems disappear. I will dig into why this is happening.
Chris Am 29.05.20, 14:51 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <[email protected]>: Hi all, so instead of just writing things down, I decided to do a video recording of all steps needed to release with maven. Unfortunately I seem to no longer able to run the maven release in the asjs repo ... however I think it's a problem not related to releases, and a more general one. I am getting: [INFO] [INFO] Apache Royale: Framework: Libs: SparkRoyale ........ FAILURE [ 0.152 s] ... [INFO] [ERROR] Failed to execute goal com.theoryinpractise:reproducible-maven-plugin:1.0.1:apply (default-cli) on project SparkRoyale: /Users/christofer.dutz/Projects/Apache/Royale/royale/royale-asjs/archetypes/royale-simple-application-pure-js-archetype/pom.xml (Too many open files) -> [Help 1] [INFO] [ERROR] Anyone hat this "too many open files" error before? I did bump my settings to: (was 4200-something before) sysctl -w kern.maxfiles=20480 Any thoughts? Chris Am 28.05.20, 18:03 schrieb "Andrew Wetmore" <[email protected]>: Seems like the simplest way. On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:55 PM Christofer Dutz <[email protected]> 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" <[email protected]>: > > 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 < > [email protected]> 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" <[email protected]>: > > > > 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 < > [email protected]> 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" < > [email protected]>: > >> > >> 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 < > [email protected]> > >> 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" < > [email protected]>: > >>> > >>> 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 < > [email protected]> > >>> 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" < > >>> [email protected]>: > >>>> > >>>> 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 < > >>> [email protected]> > >>>> napisał(a): > >>>> > >>>>> Hi Harbs, > >>>>> > >>>>> makes sense. > >>>>> > >>>>> Chris > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Am 28.05.20, 10:48 schrieb "Harbs" <[email protected]>: > >>>>> > >>>>> 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 < > >>>>> [email protected]> 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/
