Hi Piotr, Makes perfect sense to me. guess I can start with the Royale-unit surefire support first. I can also start cleaning up the maven plugin without any of the big steps. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.
So I would also suggest doing small steps, to keep all on board. The only reason I brought up this discussion was to describe the final goal for me. Chris ________________________________ Von: Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> Gesendet: Montag, 1. Juni 2020 09:43 An: Apache Royale Development <dev@royale.apache.org> Betreff: Re: [PROPOSAL] How to continue to simplify things? Carlos, Like I stated I wanted to understand what Chris did, so I will be the next RM after Harbs. I'm going to use Chris's improvements and see what exactly they means. I didn't check his video but I hope I have there complementary instructions. I'm familiar with Maven - I expect that all of that will take max 1 day and I will have RC1. If not we need to improve before any Big steps described here. I do have couple of some sort of requirements towards those steps if they are really going to happen - before I talk about them I'm going to be RM. I hope it makes sense to you. Piotr On Mon, Jun 1, 2020, 9:36 AM Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi, > > just to add to this proposal thread expressing my opinion. I think this > change will have a huge positive impact in the project: > > 1.- Reduce repos from 3 to just 1, so reducing all actions and overhead all > that implies. > 2.- Builds will be much more easy since all is contained in one repo > instead of gathering from three. Right now builds in one repo must count > with the build produced by other(s) in the chain of execution. > 3.- Remove duplicated config that could be just in one place reducing > complexity. Right now many configs are duplicated in each repo due to the > actual 3 repo layout. > 4.- Releases will turn just to 3 commands on a terminal what will be a big > point for all RMs and the project allowing us to release much more easy. > 5.- Less commands means less errors and more automation > 6.- Times to release will cut under the current 1h 30'' (as you can defer > from the sum of the times of each video posted by Chris). > 7.- The process will continue improving towards a maven compliant build and > release process with all the benefits that following a standard process > means and how all of that means to the actual Apache build and release > process. > 8.- Improving over time will be more easy too. > > For me this is one of the key points for reaching 1.0, since will mean we > are really prepared to do monthly (or bi-monthly if we want) releases of > Royale. > > About others as RMs. I think is needed to understand the actual process and > know what will mean to improve this way. So I think is good Harbs do the > next release in the actual state to gain that knowledge. In exchange I > think Piotr already knows very close since he did 0.9.6, so don't think is > needed. > > I think the optimal time frame to work on this could be: > > 1.- Harbs work this June on release. Here we could improve on version > numbers [1], since we are adding lots of stuff in each release and the bug > fixing is implied. Maybe as we settle third version numbers will be more > important, since will be less new stuff and maybe more fixing, or we could > do minor releases and bug fixing releases... > 2.- Start working on this "one repo feature". > > Thanks > > Carlos > > [1] https://semver.org/ > > > El dom., 31 may. 2020 a las 13:15, Christofer Dutz (< > christofer.d...@c-ware.de>) escribió: > > > Hi all, > > > > so thankfully Carlos watched the full 1,5 hours of my release video and > > told me it was ok ... so I'll share them with you: > > > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=1BDKG-zPW3CoWLI0KQJDO5PGyEJQtKRb4 > > > > In video 1 (27 Minutes) I am releasing the "compiler " > > In video 2 (10 Minutes) I am releasing the "typedefs" > > In video 3 (50 Minutes) I am releasing the "asjs/framework" > > > > Most additional steps are just related to the separation of the 3 repos > > ... > > If we were to merge them and I would do my refactoring to the > > royale-maven-plugin, it would just be the steps of video 1. > > > > I also added some background infos on what's happening in which step and > > why I'm doing things the way I am ... pehaps it makes the 1,5h a little > > more educational as if I just typed in the commands ... will prepare a > > text-document with all the steps ASAP. > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > Am 31.05.20, 09:29 schrieb "Yishay Weiss" <yishayj...@hotmail.com>: > > > > Alex might want to confirm, but I’m pretty sure DST issue was fixed. > > > > From: Greg Dove<mailto:greg.d...@gmail.com> > > Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2020 1:40 AM > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] How to continue to simplify things? > > > > Chris, Harbs & others, > > > > Sorry I didn't reply earlier on this thread, I have been very focused > > on > > some intense work tasks, consuming extra hours in each day for some > > time > > now. > > > > Unless I misunderstood something, I think we already had consensus on > > top-level things like: > > > > a) we need the royale sdk (as3 language support + application > > framework + > > compiler + typedefs) to continue to be usable via ant, maven, npm and > > possibly other future build tools > > b) we need the distribution/artifacts to be validated for each of the > > end-user supported build tools > > c) we need the release process to be as simple and streamlined as > > possible, > > while still keeping quality checks in place. > > > > This is just my limited interpretation/synthesis of discussions to > > date, so > > I hope it it makes sense. There were some expressions that certain > > things > > had to be done a certain way at (c) in order to achieve (b). > > If my expression above (representing my understanding) is correct, > > then I > > really don't care what tech we use to achieve (c), so long as (a) and > > (b) > > are achieved. I guess the only other thing I would add is that > > whatever we > > use for (c) should be easy to understand and maintain, but perhaps > > that is > > inherent in the 'simple and streamlined' part of what I expressed. > > > > Chris, > > Thanks for investing your time in this, and for your proposal. If my > > understanding above is correct then I think your proposal covers that > > along > > with the general improvements in maven configurations and support. > > I'll try to find time to watch the video in the coming week. > > > > One specific comment about: ' perhaps even help the automated testing > > in > > the ASJS repo.' > > At the moment there is a RoyaleUnit ant task that Josh created. If > > RoyaleUnit could somehow be supported via maven that would be > awesome. > > I > > know you have other approaches as well for automated UI testing, but > > RoyaleUnit permits re-use of legacy FlexUnit tests, so supporting > that > > via > > maven would be a major plus, I think. > > > > Harbs, > > Thanks for the suggestion that I participate as RM. I only understand > > the > > current process in a very abstract sense, apart from the time I > watched > > Chris and Carlos going through the first 7 steps. > > I agree that, in general, it's better to understand a process before > > decisions relating to improvements are considered for that process, > > and I > > know I do not really understand it well. But I don't think that needs > > to > > include me, and would prefer not to be RM in the near term. I will be > > happy > > to do this at some point, but I envisage my time being quite > > pre-occupied > > with asjs (particularly emulation) work over the next couple of > > months, and > > prefer to keep my limited neurons focused on that for now. Basically, > > I am > > happy to defer to others here. > > > > As an aside, one of the issues identified in recent weeks was the DST > > alignment issue which seemed to require DST alignment between RM's > > local > > machine and the CI server. Perhaps that is fixed now, I am not sure. > > If it > > is not then, based on the original description of the cause of that > > problem, it might preclude me being RM until it is fixed in any case, > > because that misalignment would hold true most of the year for me (I > > would > > consider it important to fix, but not urgent to fix because we have, > I > > believe, no others currently from the southern hemisphere who could > be > > RM > > right now anyway). > > > > > > Greg > > > > On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 4:02 AM Christofer Dutz < > > christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Today I just prepared my forks of royale again and did a full > > release of > > > all 3 repos and did a video recording of that. > > > I did find some minor quirks which I'll whip up a PR for (no > profile > > name > > > or directory changes). > > > > > > As soon as I am finished cutting the video and removed lots minutes > > of > > > jewl-theme-compilation stuff I'll publish the link to the videos > > here. > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > Am 28.05.20, 18:03 schrieb "Andrew Wetmore" <cottag...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > 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/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira >
