Why does this require a enterprise development account? If the app it to be placed in the App Stores, a normal personal account should be enough.
> As for Android, it's more complicated in China as we need to apply tens of > Chinese Android distribution channel plus Google Play. I am also a contributor to https://github.com/fastlane/fastlane, a tool that can be used to automate the build and deployment of iOS and Android apps. If playground is split to its own repository, it would be an interesting project to automate that process. I would volunteer to set that up (or at least get it started, until I hit the barrier that I don't know Chinese - then I would gladly collaborate with a native Chinese speaker). I agree with the rest YorkShen wrote, so lets see if ASF has any suggestion regarding the App Store accounts. -J Am Di., 28. Mai 2019 um 09:01 Uhr schrieb 申远 <[email protected]>: > > The publishing of Weex Playground is hold as soon as we learned it may > violate ASF policy here. > > Maybe we should find a way to let the PMC member to provide the convenience > > binary. > > > The tricky thing here is that we need an Apple/Google enterprise > development account under a company's or individual's name. And the Apple > account would cost us 299 USD per year. As for Android, it's more > complicated in China as we need to apply tens of Chinese Android > distribution channel plus Google Play. > > Maybe we should remove Weex Playground from Apple Store and Google Play, > and host Weex Playground(Binary) only in our website? I think we'd better > not do any release nor separate repos of Weex Playground until we get > response from general@incubator > > Best Regards, > YorkShen > > 申远 > > > Willem Jiang <[email protected]> 于2019年5月28日周二 上午11:31写道： > > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 8:04 PM 申远 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I agree with that. > > > > > > Moving playground to another separate repository(also under ASF?) may > > take > > > couple of days, I don't think there will be big technical issue. > > > > > > But this doesn't solve the issue that Weex Playground is under Apple > > > Developer Enterprise Program Account of Taobao (China) Software. And > > there > > > is a similar situation for Weex Android Playground. > > > > > > > So, it looks like Taobao publish the binary release of Weex Playground. > > I'm not sure if it is OK for Apache. > > Maybe we should find a way to let the PMC member to provide the > > convenience binary. > > > > > > > I could and would mark thing "Stuff that some third party provides for > > > Apache Weex", but for "Stuff for Weex the Apache Weex team also > > provides", > > > this is really confusing concept. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > YorkShen > > > > > > 申远 > > > > > > > > > Jan Piotrowski <[email protected]> 于2019年5月27日周一 下午4:32写道： > > > > > > > Thanks for the clarification. I understand why the Playground app is > > > > valuable and awesome for developers. > > > > > > > > Would it be an option to move the playground and connected code (e.g. > > > > for http://dotwe.org/vue) to a separate repository? Or does the > > > > `playground` code benefit so much from being in the same repository? > > > > > > > > For me right now this is one of these cases, where it is totally > > > > unclear what actually is part of "Apache Weex" (vs. "Stuff for Weex > > > > the Apache Weex team also provides" vs. "Stuff that some third party > > > > provides for Apache Weex"). > > > > > > > > -J > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Mo., 27. Mai 2019 um 09:01 Uhr schrieb 申远 <[email protected]>: > > > > > > > > > > Let me rephrase myself. > > > > > > > > > > - The code of Android or iOS playground app is never part of > > Apache > > > > > Release. The release scripts always delete code of the Playground > > App > > > > > before publishing release candidate. > > > > > - The code of playground and weex_sdk is loosely coupled and the > > > > > playground is mainly for demo purpose, like Google Sample [1]. It > > > > should > > > > > *never* go into real product environment. > > > > > - But the playground does provide developers the convenience of > > > > > verifying the API or feature of Weex. They just need write code > > > > snippet > > > > > online [2], and scan the QR code, then they get what they write. > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/googlesamples > > > > > [2] http://dotwe.org/vue > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > > YorkShen > > > > > > > > > > 申远 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan Piotrowski <[email protected]> 于2019年5月24日周五 下午8:14写道： > > > > > > > > > > > A compiled Android or iOS native app is actually an interesting > > case. > > > > > > Is this actually part of the release, or is just the source code of > > > > > > the app? > > > > > > > > > > > > How tightly coupled are weex and the playground app anyway? Right > > now > > > > > > the playground app seems to live in a `playground` subfolder of > > `ios` > > > > > > and `android`. Would it maybe make sense to split that off in its > > own > > > > > > repo and have its own releases? I don't expect actual users of > > weex to > > > > > > really need the `playground` code, or do they? > > > > > > > > > > > > But yes, it would definitely be better to have this app not be > > > > > > published via a different commercial entity - no matter if you > > define > > > > > > the binary app to be part of the release or not. If Apache itself > > has > > > > > > a App Store Connect account I don't know though - best start by > > asking > > > > > > INFRA via a ticket. (Maybe it could also be published via one of > > the > > > > > > committers personal account as a fallback) > > > > > > > > > > > > -J > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -J > > > > > > > > > > > > Am Fr., 24. Mai 2019 um 12:20 Uhr schrieb 申远 <[email protected] > > >: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Community > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Weex 0.24.0 is released now, one can download source or > > convenience > > > > > > binary > > > > > > > through the link in our website [1]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And there is a remaining issue for the release. One may notice > > that > > > > there > > > > > > > exists a showcase app called Weex Playground[2], which is > > compiled > > > > > > > from incubator-weex, but it is not a part os Apache Release as > > the > > > > > > release > > > > > > > script deleted the files of Playground when publishing release > > > > candidate. > > > > > > > As one need a enterprise certificates to publish an iOS App, we > > used > > > > to > > > > > > > borrow the certificates from Taobao(China), LTD. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Based on the fact above, I have following concerns: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. I'd like to know whether it is ok to exclude some file > > during > > > > > > apache > > > > > > > release, like the code for Weex playground > > > > > > > 2. I am not sure whether it is suitable that I continue > > borrow the > > > > > > > enterprise certificates from Taobao(China), LTD and publish > > the > > > > iOS > > > > > > App. If > > > > > > > it is not acceptable, is there any iOS enterprise certificates > > > > under > > > > > > ASF? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] > > https://weex.apache.org/download/download.html#latest-release > > > > > > > [2] https://itunes.apple.com/cn/app/weex-playground/id1130862662 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > > > > > YorkShen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 申远 > > > > > > > > > > > >
