Carlos, I do have a good knowledge about our current release process, but what Chris's proposed is a different approach - That approach I wanted to try, cause as far as I understand him - everything is in place and anyone can right now do 3 steps release.
Chris, What do you mean by "cleaning up the maven plugin" ? Why do you wanted to do this before I have tried your way of releasing SDK ? How it influence whole process ? What if we reject putting together repository in 1 - Does your cleaning up change something - that you will have to revert later ? Thanks, Piotr pon., 1 cze 2020 o 11:21 Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> napisał(a): > Hi, > > that's ok for me too. Just was to expose what I think will be the most > optimal trip, since I thought you had a good knowledge of actual state of > things and what will be the improvements. But if you think you need to > follow up that's fine too. > > > > > El lun., 1 jun. 2020 a las 10:24, Christofer Dutz (< > [email protected]>) escribió: > > > 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 <[email protected]> > > Gesendet: Montag, 1. Juni 2020 09:43 > > An: Apache Royale Development <[email protected]> > > 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 <[email protected]> > > 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 (< > > > [email protected]>) 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" <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > Alex might want to confirm, but I’m pretty sure DST issue was > > fixed. > > > > > > > > From: Greg Dove<mailto:[email protected]> > > > > Sent: Sunday, May 31, 2020 1:40 AM > > > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:[email protected]> > > > > 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 < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > 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" < > [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/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Carlos Rovira > > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > > > > > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira > -- Piotr Zarzycki Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
