Re: globalplayer.swc

[Alex Harui]

IMO, we won't lose anything without playerglobal.  All JS compiles in the
Royale JSOnly nightly build package don't have playerglobal/airglobal.

As you saw, there are currently some nasty circularities in the build
workflow for Ant.  AIUI, Maven gets around it by not running every test.

There isn't too much rewriting, instead, I'm moving lots of files.  Most
of the moving has already been pushed to feature/rename.  The main problem
is that there are some tests that want to use royals-typedefs.  This is a
bad idea:  a build should not need to look at downstream repos.  So, the
plan is to juggle files so the build can build ExternC before building the
SWF or JS compilers, and use ExternC to create the basic classes we need
to write SWF and JS tests like Object, Array, Number.

This should make Maven builds also not need any Flash/AIR stuff as Carlos
mentions.  I think there will be a Maven profile that runs SWF and Royale
Framework dependent tests.  Maven may still need the utils profile to be
run first from a brand new machine.  Fixing that is not a goal of this
refactor, but if I find a way I will take care of that as well.

Right now the plan is to add an additional jar "compiler-common.jar" to
hold the classes that enable us to build ExternC early.

HTH,
-Alex

On 11/19/17, 3:08 AM, "Erik de Bruin"  wrote:

>>
>> The whole point of the feature/rename branch is to remove references to
>> Flex and Flash and that includes removing dependency on both
>> playerglobal.swc and airglobal.swc.
>>
>> My goal is that the first Royale release does not require
>> playerglobal/airglobal, but you can bring it down as an optional
>>feature.
>>
>
>Can you elaborate a bit? I'm curious how that would work, and what
>(AS/MXML) features one would lose without playerglobal ;-)
>
>How extensive a re-write are you doing for this? Is it both on the
>compiler
>and compiler-jx?
>
>I'm working on a branch off develop... I would hate being caught in a
>massive merge conflict once your changes land. Am I better off tracking
>your feature branch? How stable is that?
>
>Thanks,
>
>EdB
>
>
>
>-- 
>Ix Multimedia Software
>
>Jan Luykenstraat 27
>3521 VB Utrecht
>
>T. 06-51952295
>I. 
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=www.ixsoftware.nl=
>02%7C01%7C%7C7f7e6445dae648c1b67308d52f3e0141%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178
>decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636466865741794198=kHzh5jJsprG4RYRKD5%2Bf1zIDOQuBeF
>z1pBPuff%2BGJOA%3D=0

Re: [royale-asjs] branch develop updated: Use fixed version in pom instead property for CreateJSExample

[Piotr Zarzycki]

I will probably revert it soon.

Thanks, Piotr

2017-11-19 23:35 GMT+01:00 Justin Mclean :

> Hi,
>
> > -  ${royale.typedefs.version}
> > +  0.9.0-SNAPSHOT
>
> Is hard coding the version number really a good idea? We would have to
> change it every release.
>
> Also setting it to snapshot may mean inconsistent results from time to
> time as snapshots change.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
>


-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
*

[website] Get Involved page

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi,

the get involved page is ready:

http://royale.codeoscopic.com/get-involved/

this page is very similar to the one in flex website, so not much to
comment here.

I only modified on to point to GitHub, issues (instead of JIRA) and pull
request instead of patches.

As well ask people to contribute to the website, with blog entries and
articles.

Please review it if you find something wrong or something to update.

Thanks!


-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

[website] Source code page and GitHub menu items

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi,

just end Source Code page:

http://royale.codeoscopic.com/source-code/

Here I only mention the 3 repos that I consider are of interest for Royale
users. I'm talking about compiler, typedefs and framework.

The other three are website, docs and tourjs. I thought about those repos
and:

* website is nothing we release, so no point in make it relevant in a
marketing web, since it even will have a negative point of introduce noise,
and that should avoided.
* docs: The documentation, wiki and other resources are of use to consume
web, make accesible through the website, be available in GitHub, and the
rest. If people wants to contribute, they will be entering the royale world
as a developer and will end having knowledge, and conversations with us. So
they will end knowing about Royale-docs repo.
* tourjs: is the only one I think is interesting to post in this page, but
I think it currently is not developed, so at this time, we should avoid to
post things that are not in an usable form. We can get back to this at a
later time.

Finaly, other way to make people go directly to source code is in the menu
through the GitHub menu item as many other projects out there does. The
difference is that we have several repos and other projects only has one.
So we need some "index" page.

I put temporarily the following link as I was looking for some GitHub
"project" page, but that does not exist in GitHub:

https://github.com/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93=apache+royale=

The problem here is that a search shows the official Apache Royale repos,
but as well others could enter in the list (like Piotr repo).

So I created a similar one in our wiki to make the entry point from our web
to GitHub :

https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/wiki/Apache-Royale-Source-Code-Repositories

And this is the page I linked in the main Github menu item in the website
and in the footer menu


Let me know whatever point you want to consider here.

Thanks

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

Re: globalplayer.swc

[Carlos Rovira]

That sounds very good Alex
I think having flash/flex/air added as a "plugin" later for people that
would want to add that output, is the better approach.
As well, that would make the weight lighter, and for building, in the case
of maven will remove all the artifact dependencies to flash/flex and the
mavenizer that make us to use the settings xml. So it would be more easy.
However, is important that we could add SWF support later, but for what you
said, seems to be the plan already
So +1 to this change
Thanks

2017-11-19 7:38 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> I don't know about playerglobal.swc, but airglobal.swc will be around for
> Adobe AIR.
>
> The whole point of the feature/rename branch is to remove references to
> Flex and Flash and that includes removing dependency on both
> playerglobal.swc and airglobal.swc.
>
> My goal is that the first Royale release does not require
> playerglobal/airglobal, but you can bring it down as an optional feature.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>

Re: globalplayer.swc

[Erik de Bruin]

>
> The whole point of the feature/rename branch is to remove references to
> Flex and Flash and that includes removing dependency on both
> playerglobal.swc and airglobal.swc.
>
> My goal is that the first Royale release does not require
> playerglobal/airglobal, but you can bring it down as an optional feature.
>

Can you elaborate a bit? I'm curious how that would work, and what
(AS/MXML) features one would lose without playerglobal ;-)

How extensive a re-write are you doing for this? Is it both on the compiler
and compiler-jx?

I'm working on a branch off develop... I would hate being caught in a
massive merge conflict once your changes land. Am I better off tracking
your feature branch? How stable is that?

Thanks,

EdB



-- 
Ix Multimedia Software

Jan Luykenstraat 27
3521 VB Utrecht

T. 06-51952295
I. www.ixsoftware.nl