Re: [DRAFT] [ANNOUNCE] Apache Royale 0.9.0 Released

[Piotr Zarzycki]

I have published ->
https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/releases/tag/apache-royale-0.9.0

2018-01-25 7:18 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki :

> Alex,
>
> We can edit text later, that is not a problem.
>
> Piotr
>
> 2018-01-25 0:35 GMT+01:00 OmPrakash Muppirala :
>
>> I think it is perfectly fine to announce without npm support.  We can add
>> it in our next release.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Om
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Alex Harui 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > If we can edit the text later, then IMO, go ahead and publish.
>> >
>> > If not, we might want to wait to hear from more folks.
>> >
>> > -Alex
>> >
>> > On 1/24/18, 3:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > >I have created release on GitHub - It's unpublished [1] - Do we want to
>> > >add
>> > >something more there ?
>> > >
>> > >[1]
>> > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> > https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
>> > >m%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Funtagged-
>> > 3e7dc9305c4ad1eaa804&
>> > >data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2688068931e74b0ed20b08d56381
>> > 0cae%7Cfa7
>> > >b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524328276148227&
>> > sdata=waf5UTV1g
>> > >Rint9dmutBs6v2y7USv3KNP3dJKI7%2FzZFs%3D=0
>> > >
>> > >Thanks, Piotr
>> > >
>> > >2018-01-24 23:06 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
>> > >
>> > >> Hi thanks Alex and Andrew,
>> > >>
>> > >> right now we are having such moderate impact on internet. For
>> example in
>> > >> twitter we have 135 followers, in facebook 40. We have the accounts
>> open
>> > >> about 15 days like the website. So we can make huge noise right now.
>> > >>Just
>> > >> letting people know we release our first release is great, but we
>> must
>> > >> lower expectations about actual Apache Royale state since although
>> the
>> > >> technology in in place, to make real apps it's not as friendly as
>> Flex,
>> > >>and
>> > >> we don't want people coming get frustrated about that. But this is a
>> > >> required step in order to follow up improving royale
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> 2018-01-24 19:00 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>> > >>
>> > >> > Tweakage: I would change this passage
>> > >> >
>> > >> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of
>> this
>> > >> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
>> > >> > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base
>> > >>into an
>> > >> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity
>> developing
>> > >> > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may
>> not
>> > >> > handle production needs.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > to this
>> > >> >
>> > >> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of
>> this
>> > >> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
>> > >> > strategies, and and to recruit new contributors. We hope to grow
>> the
>> > >>code
>> > >> > base into an
>> > >> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity when
>> > >>developing
>> > >> > applications that can run on many platforms. Beta releases may not
>> > >> > handle production needs.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Alex Harui
>> > > >
>> > >> > wrote:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > Please comment on the draft below. Quite frankly, I'm not clear
>> how
>> > >> much
>> > >> > > noise we want to make about 0.9.0.  Looks like NPM is not
>> working at
>> > >> all.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Thoughts?
>> > >> > > -Alex
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > ---
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > The Apache Royale community is pleased to announce the release of
>> > >> Apache
>> > >> > > Royale 0.9.0.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Apache Royale is a new project that took over the work on what
>> was
>> > >> being
>> > >> > > called FlexJS, a next-generation of the Apache Flex SDK that
>> enables
>> > >> > > developers to use MXML and ActionScript to generated HTML/JS/CSS
>> so
>> > >> > > applications can run natively in browsers.  The cross-compiled
>> code
>> > >>can
>> > >> > > also be used in Apache Cordova (Adobe PhoneGap) mobile
>> applications.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > (Apache Flex is a highly productive, open source application
>> > >>framework
>> > >> > for
>> > >> > > building and maintaining expressive applications that deploy on
>> > >>Adobe
>> > >> > > Flash and Adobe AIR to provide a consistent experience on all
>> major
>> > >> > > browsers, desktops and devices.)
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of
>> > >>this
>> > >> > > release is to gather feedback about the features and
>> implementation
>> > >> > > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base
>> > >>into
>> > >> an
>> > >> > > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity
>> developing
>> > >> > > applications that can run in the 

Re: [DRAFT] [ANNOUNCE] Apache Royale 0.9.0 Released

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Alex,

We can edit text later, that is not a problem.

Piotr

2018-01-25 0:35 GMT+01:00 OmPrakash Muppirala :

> I think it is perfectly fine to announce without npm support.  We can add
> it in our next release.
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
> > If we can edit the text later, then IMO, go ahead and publish.
> >
> > If not, we might want to wait to hear from more folks.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 1/24/18, 3:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
> >
> > >I have created release on GitHub - It's unpublished [1] - Do we want to
> > >add
> > >something more there ?
> > >
> > >[1]
> > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
> > >m%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Funtagged-
> > 3e7dc9305c4ad1eaa804&
> > >data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2688068931e74b0ed20b08d56381
> > 0cae%7Cfa7
> > >b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524328276148227&
> > sdata=waf5UTV1g
> > >Rint9dmutBs6v2y7USv3KNP3dJKI7%2FzZFs%3D=0
> > >
> > >Thanks, Piotr
> > >
> > >2018-01-24 23:06 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
> > >
> > >> Hi thanks Alex and Andrew,
> > >>
> > >> right now we are having such moderate impact on internet. For example
> in
> > >> twitter we have 135 followers, in facebook 40. We have the accounts
> open
> > >> about 15 days like the website. So we can make huge noise right now.
> > >>Just
> > >> letting people know we release our first release is great, but we must
> > >> lower expectations about actual Apache Royale state since although the
> > >> technology in in place, to make real apps it's not as friendly as
> Flex,
> > >>and
> > >> we don't want people coming get frustrated about that. But this is a
> > >> required step in order to follow up improving royale
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2018-01-24 19:00 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
> > >>
> > >> > Tweakage: I would change this passage
> > >> >
> > >> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of
> this
> > >> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> > >> > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base
> > >>into an
> > >> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
> > >> > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
> > >> > handle production needs.
> > >> >
> > >> > to this
> > >> >
> > >> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of
> this
> > >> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> > >> > strategies, and and to recruit new contributors. We hope to grow the
> > >>code
> > >> > base into an
> > >> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity when
> > >>developing
> > >> > applications that can run on many platforms. Beta releases may not
> > >> > handle production needs.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Alex Harui
>  > >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Please comment on the draft below. Quite frankly, I'm not clear
> how
> > >> much
> > >> > > noise we want to make about 0.9.0.  Looks like NPM is not working
> at
> > >> all.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Thoughts?
> > >> > > -Alex
> > >> > >
> > >> > > ---
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The Apache Royale community is pleased to announce the release of
> > >> Apache
> > >> > > Royale 0.9.0.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Apache Royale is a new project that took over the work on what was
> > >> being
> > >> > > called FlexJS, a next-generation of the Apache Flex SDK that
> enables
> > >> > > developers to use MXML and ActionScript to generated HTML/JS/CSS
> so
> > >> > > applications can run natively in browsers.  The cross-compiled
> code
> > >>can
> > >> > > also be used in Apache Cordova (Adobe PhoneGap) mobile
> applications.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > (Apache Flex is a highly productive, open source application
> > >>framework
> > >> > for
> > >> > > building and maintaining expressive applications that deploy on
> > >>Adobe
> > >> > > Flash and Adobe AIR to provide a consistent experience on all
> major
> > >> > > browsers, desktops and devices.)
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of
> > >>this
> > >> > > release is to gather feedback about the features and
> implementation
> > >> > > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base
> > >>into
> > >> an
> > >> > > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity
> developing
> > >> > > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may
> not
> > >> > > handle production needs.  Expect lots of bugs and
> > >> > > missing features.  Please file bugs at:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
> > >>om%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Fissues=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> > 

Re: Migrating existing FlexJS documentation to Royale

[Alex Harui]

OK, got jekyll working locally.  I followed these instructions:

https://www.phusionpassenger.com/library/walkthroughs/deploy/ruby/ownserver
/standalone/oss/install_language_runtime.html

One of the steps was to install bundler.  That might be why you got the
.bundle error.

You will also need to copy _config.yml to local_config.yml and edit the
baseurl to the path to your repo.  You will get errors in the console that
it can't load the CSS until you get that right.

Then I set the current directory to the royale-docs repo and run:

  jekyll build --config local_config.yml


I did this on my Mac.  The CI server is running Jekyll on Windows.  I
followed the steps for installing Jekyll on Cygwin because the CI server
is running a version of Windows that may not be supported by Ubuntu on
Windows.  I followed this post:
https://matt.scharley.me/2012/03/windows-cygwin-and-jekyll.html

HTH,
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 3:36 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:

>I haven't been testing locally.  I just push it and build it on the CI
>server.
>
>I will look into building it locally.  On the CI server, we are only using
>"Jekyll build" and not "Jekyll serve".  And you will probably have to use
>a custom config file to override the default baseurl.
>
>Right now, the site is so small that it builds really quickly, so I don't
>think I care if you also just push/build/test.  Just let us know when you
>are in there so we don't make other changes to the files.
>
>I'll post instructions for local builds once I figure it out.
>
>-Alex
>
>On 1/24/18, 2:51 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
> wrote:
>
>>Thanks Alex,
>>I can see it working online :)
>>I'm trying to test it localy but don't know how to do it.
>>In order to make the html/css looks good, I need to work localy, please
>>let
>>me know how yo do it
>>I installed already ruby, jekyll, etc... and tried to run "bundle exec
>>jekyll serve" but we don't have Gem file result is:
>>
>>Could not locate Gemfile or .bundle/ directory
>>
>>Maybe there's a more easy way to test this.
>>
>>Carlos
>>
>>
>>2018-01-19 21:59 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>>
>>> OK, I got the CSS to load.  You can hit this link:
>>>
>>> 
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fapache.
>>>g
>>>ithub.io%2Froyale-docs%2Ftest%2Ftest.html=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.
>>>c
>>>om%7Cef158780d4714a61dfb908d5637d039e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1
>>>%
>>>7C0%7C0%7C636524310941764543=mD2KTprJ9GvEsEjVw1k256pI8yq0BbP%2F%2B
>>>o
>>>DkQhpAckI%3D=0
>>>
>>> I'm going to look into automatic TOC generation next.  IMO, we should
>>> decide what kind of header/footer we want not only for the docs on this
>>> site, but for ASDoc and Olaf's TryItNow as well and start implementing
>>>it.
>>>  Like this page, it may not look great right away, but we can iterate
>>> towards making it look good.
>>>
>>> My 2 cents,
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> On 1/19/18, 1:10 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>>>
>>> >I'm out of time for today, but I tested templates and jekyll and
>>>started
>>> >to get something to work.
>>> >
>>> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>>> https%3A%2F%2Fapache.gi
>>> >thub.io%2Froyale-docs%2Ftest%2Ftest.html=02%7C01%7Caharui%
>>> 40adobe.com
>>> >%7C8d9c2ab112564497fb2608d55f1c7c23%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>>> cee1%7C0
>>> >%7C0%7C636519498299260185=2egj2BghYos4ur%
>>> 2FUSpvN4Vrzh8IOj6rPngvyAJe8
>>> >ZqM%3D=0
>>> >
>>> >You can see the test/test.md and _layouts/docpage.html in the
>>>royals-docs
>>> >repo.  The CSS file didn't load for some reason.  Feel free to figure
>>>it
>>> >out or I will look into it tomorrow.
>>> >
>>> >HTH,
>>> >-Alex
>>> >
>>> >On 1/18/18, 6:08 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>This is for doc, not code so I'm not sure the issue I raised matters.
>>> >>
>>> >>That said, I've been reading this [1] and it seems like we should be
>>>able
>>> >>to set up a few templates sort of like we did flex.a.o and not worry
>>>so
>>> >>much about customizing a third-party theme.
>>> >>
>>> >>[1]
>>> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>>> https%3A%2F%2Fjekyllrb
>>> >>.
>>> >>com%2Fdocs=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>>> 7C6fca45a581614f01bbd008d55e
>>> >>e
>>> >>190da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>>> 7C636519245260410634
>>> >>t
>>> >>a=SnZeokcfQXRyaHs338A04ENYTLx%2FWSwo42KPSsA3S9k%3D=0
>>> >>
>>> >>On 1/18/18, 5:28 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
>>>wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>>Carlos,
>>> >>>
>>> >>>I like your findings jeckyll theme doc.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>It looks like we may have again similar issue with license as we
>>>have in
>>> >>>MDLExample.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>Can someone raise jira for both cases? Alex raises question on legal
>>> >>>couple
>>> >>>of days ago. No responses. Let's not wait block us with it - push
>>>things
>>> >>>forward. Jira could be better to 

Re: Updating 2015 FlexJS presentation

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

I also have a couple of Royale examples on GitHub that might be useful. [1][2] 
They are not complex applications but they are a little more that a basic hello 
world app. You can see them working here. [3][4]

For the Quiz (I just put up today) I may of made mistakes and it likely some 
words and sentences probably need correcting. Proof readers and PRs welcome.

BTW it doesn’t save your scores anywhere so if you get a question wrong only 
you will know but hopefully you might learn something :-)

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://github.com/justinmclean/ApacheLogos
2. https://github.com/justinmclean/ApacheQuiz
3. https://rawgit.com/justinmclean/ApacheLogos/master/compiled/index.html
4. https://rawgit.com/justinmclean/ApacheQuiz/master/compiled/index.html

Re: [DRAFT] [ANNOUNCE] Apache Royale 0.9.0 Released

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

I think it is perfectly fine to announce without npm support.  We can add
it in our next release.

Thanks,
Om

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 3:31 PM, Alex Harui 
wrote:

> If we can edit the text later, then IMO, go ahead and publish.
>
> If not, we might want to wait to hear from more folks.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 3:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>
> >I have created release on GitHub - It's unpublished [1] - Do we want to
> >add
> >something more there ?
> >
> >[1]
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
> >m%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Funtagged-
> 3e7dc9305c4ad1eaa804&
> >data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2688068931e74b0ed20b08d56381
> 0cae%7Cfa7
> >b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524328276148227&
> sdata=waf5UTV1g
> >Rint9dmutBs6v2y7USv3KNP3dJKI7%2FzZFs%3D=0
> >
> >Thanks, Piotr
> >
> >2018-01-24 23:06 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
> >
> >> Hi thanks Alex and Andrew,
> >>
> >> right now we are having such moderate impact on internet. For example in
> >> twitter we have 135 followers, in facebook 40. We have the accounts open
> >> about 15 days like the website. So we can make huge noise right now.
> >>Just
> >> letting people know we release our first release is great, but we must
> >> lower expectations about actual Apache Royale state since although the
> >> technology in in place, to make real apps it's not as friendly as Flex,
> >>and
> >> we don't want people coming get frustrated about that. But this is a
> >> required step in order to follow up improving royale
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2018-01-24 19:00 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
> >>
> >> > Tweakage: I would change this passage
> >> >
> >> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
> >> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> >> > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base
> >>into an
> >> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
> >> > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
> >> > handle production needs.
> >> >
> >> > to this
> >> >
> >> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
> >> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> >> > strategies, and and to recruit new contributors. We hope to grow the
> >>code
> >> > base into an
> >> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity when
> >>developing
> >> > applications that can run on many platforms. Beta releases may not
> >> > handle production needs.
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Alex Harui  >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Please comment on the draft below. Quite frankly, I'm not clear how
> >> much
> >> > > noise we want to make about 0.9.0.  Looks like NPM is not working at
> >> all.
> >> > >
> >> > > Thoughts?
> >> > > -Alex
> >> > >
> >> > > ---
> >> > >
> >> > > The Apache Royale community is pleased to announce the release of
> >> Apache
> >> > > Royale 0.9.0.
> >> > >
> >> > > Apache Royale is a new project that took over the work on what was
> >> being
> >> > > called FlexJS, a next-generation of the Apache Flex SDK that enables
> >> > > developers to use MXML and ActionScript to generated HTML/JS/CSS so
> >> > > applications can run natively in browsers.  The cross-compiled code
> >>can
> >> > > also be used in Apache Cordova (Adobe PhoneGap) mobile applications.
> >> > >
> >> > > (Apache Flex is a highly productive, open source application
> >>framework
> >> > for
> >> > > building and maintaining expressive applications that deploy on
> >>Adobe
> >> > > Flash and Adobe AIR to provide a consistent experience on all major
> >> > > browsers, desktops and devices.)
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of
> >>this
> >> > > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> >> > > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base
> >>into
> >> an
> >> > > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
> >> > > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
> >> > > handle production needs.  Expect lots of bugs and
> >> > > missing features.  Please file bugs at:
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
> >>om%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Fissues=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> %7C26
> >>88068931e74b0ed20b08d563810cae%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0
> >>%7C636524328276148227=WQg0itgboRLm33P7H1kRIivRGsNB0p
> c7lmzLZMgfspE%3
> >>D=0
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > (If you happen to know it is a compiler issue, please use:
> >> > >
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
> >>om%2Fapache%2Froyale-compiler%2Fissues=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com

Re: Updating 2015 FlexJS presentation

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 2:15 PM, Andrew Wetmore  wrote:

> Thank you, Om.
>
> Quick question: the slides refer to several FlexJS examples. Are they still
> running? Will they eventually migrate to Royale versions?
>

All the examples continue to work with Apache Royale.  They are available
here: https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/tree/develop/examples


>
> I am tempted to make a first migration of this slide deck with the
> substance but without the links to the examples. Then, when we have
> examples running in Royale versions, I would update the presentation.


> I will have other questions about how two years of development may have
> affected the texts...
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 6:03 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala  >
> wrote:
>
> > Andrew,
> >
> > Please feel free to take this presentation and modify it.  I have made
> the
> > original ppt file available here:
> > https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/FPveqBSWJ5PiXXYkbSslIC36LLVgMY
> > sHg8UUNHEV2c
> >
> > I don't have a presentation script (I just winged it :-D)  But I would
> > guess that by the time you make your changes, you might want to get
> > yourself a new script.
> >
> > Glad to help in any way, just let me know.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Om
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Andrew Wetmore 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi:
> > >
> > > Om presented this slide deck at ApacheCon in 2015 [1]. The FlexJS help
> > docs
> > > refer to it, and I wondered if it would be worth updating for current
> use
> > > with Royale.
> > >
> > > I would be happy to do the grunt work of updating the slides if someone
> > can
> > > provide the PowerPoint. Do we have a place to host such things?
> > >
> > > Oh, was there a presentation script with this? If it is written out, I
> > > would be glad to record it and turn it and the PowerPoint into a little
> > > video we could post (and host) on YouTube. I do a lot of voice work for
> > > various companies and record audio and assemble videos for them in my
> own
> > > studio.
> > >
> > > a
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > https://events.static.linuxfound.org/sites/events/
> > > files/slides/FlexJS_ApacheCon_2015.pdf
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Wetmore
> > >
> > > http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew Wetmore
>
> http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
>

Re: [DRAFT] [ANNOUNCE] Apache Royale 0.9.0 Released

[Alex Harui]

If we can edit the text later, then IMO, go ahead and publish.

If not, we might want to wait to hear from more folks.

-Alex

On 1/24/18, 3:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

>I have created release on GitHub - It's unpublished [1] - Do we want to
>add
>something more there ?
>
>[1]
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
>m%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Freleases%2Ftag%2Funtagged-3e7dc9305c4ad1eaa804&
>data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2688068931e74b0ed20b08d563810cae%7Cfa7
>b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524328276148227=waf5UTV1g
>Rint9dmutBs6v2y7USv3KNP3dJKI7%2FzZFs%3D=0
>
>Thanks, Piotr
>
>2018-01-24 23:06 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
>
>> Hi thanks Alex and Andrew,
>>
>> right now we are having such moderate impact on internet. For example in
>> twitter we have 135 followers, in facebook 40. We have the accounts open
>> about 15 days like the website. So we can make huge noise right now.
>>Just
>> letting people know we release our first release is great, but we must
>> lower expectations about actual Apache Royale state since although the
>> technology in in place, to make real apps it's not as friendly as Flex,
>>and
>> we don't want people coming get frustrated about that. But this is a
>> required step in order to follow up improving royale
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2018-01-24 19:00 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>>
>> > Tweakage: I would change this passage
>> >
>> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
>> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
>> > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base
>>into an
>> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
>> > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
>> > handle production needs.
>> >
>> > to this
>> >
>> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
>> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
>> > strategies, and and to recruit new contributors. We hope to grow the
>>code
>> > base into an
>> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity when
>>developing
>> > applications that can run on many platforms. Beta releases may not
>> > handle production needs.
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Alex Harui 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Please comment on the draft below. Quite frankly, I'm not clear how
>> much
>> > > noise we want to make about 0.9.0.  Looks like NPM is not working at
>> all.
>> > >
>> > > Thoughts?
>> > > -Alex
>> > >
>> > > ---
>> > >
>> > > The Apache Royale community is pleased to announce the release of
>> Apache
>> > > Royale 0.9.0.
>> > >
>> > > Apache Royale is a new project that took over the work on what was
>> being
>> > > called FlexJS, a next-generation of the Apache Flex SDK that enables
>> > > developers to use MXML and ActionScript to generated HTML/JS/CSS so
>> > > applications can run natively in browsers.  The cross-compiled code
>>can
>> > > also be used in Apache Cordova (Adobe PhoneGap) mobile applications.
>> > >
>> > > (Apache Flex is a highly productive, open source application
>>framework
>> > for
>> > > building and maintaining expressive applications that deploy on
>>Adobe
>> > > Flash and Adobe AIR to provide a consistent experience on all major
>> > > browsers, desktops and devices.)
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of
>>this
>> > > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
>> > > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base
>>into
>> an
>> > > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
>> > > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
>> > > handle production needs.  Expect lots of bugs and
>> > > missing features.  Please file bugs at:
>> > >
>> > > 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
>>om%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Fissues=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C26
>>88068931e74b0ed20b08d563810cae%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0
>>%7C636524328276148227=WQg0itgboRLm33P7H1kRIivRGsNB0pc7lmzLZMgfspE%3
>>D=0
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > (If you happen to know it is a compiler issue, please use:
>> > > 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c
>>om%2Fapache%2Froyale-compiler%2Fissues=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>>7C2688068931e74b0ed20b08d563810cae%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0
>>%7C0%7C636524328276148227=WYkRL9ilEZW61EF1JfrWl314pimxsbB11NFRA%2Bs
>>gPkA%3D=0)
>> > >
>> > > For questions about how to use Royale, send email to
>> > > us...@royale.apache.org.  For questions and feedback on the
>> development
>> > of
>> > > the source code in the release, send email to dev@royale.apache.org.
>> > >
>> > > Apache Royale is available in source and binary
>> > 

Re: Directory and File naming conventions

[Alex Harui]

The .md files get built by Jekyll on our CI server.  The results end up
here:

http://apacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/job/RoyaleDocs_Stagin
g/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/_site/

HTH,
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 2:21 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Hi, I see you work in develop thought GitHub with .md files. I can see as
>well .css with website fonts. But I don't know how to see the generated
>site.
>Can someone explain me how to see the final html content resulting from
>apply the css to the markdown files?
>
>Thanks
>
>2018-01-24 22:13 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>
>> OK, I'm done playing in the Welcome folder.  The third-tier TOC seems to
>> be working.
>>
>> I am moving on to the CreateAnApplication folder.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/24/18, 12:10 PM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
>>
>> >I should have added that I will go edit out the hyphens in the front
>> >matter.
>> >
>> >On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Andrew Wetmore 
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Let's give it a try.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Alex Harui
>>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 1/24/18, 9:59 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> >Hi Andrew,
>> >>> >
>> >>> >Thanks for doing the research.  I didn't even think about "-".
>>That
>> >>> seems
>> >>> >like a good idea to me.
>> >>>
>> >>> Speaking of '-', I saw in your recent commit that the Front Matter
>> >>>title
>> >>> had '-' in it.  That title becomes the  so I
>>don't
>> >>> think that should have '-' in it.  I think it can use plain spaces
>>and
>> >>> doesn't need escaping.  I don't think it is used to resolve links.
>> >>>
>> >>> Thoughts?
>> >>> -Alex
>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Andrew Wetmore
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14
>> >>.blogspot.com%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7C19666b9f52de4eed2204
>> >>08d563668a33%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524214405634
>> 
774=MFWkvT%2ByNTI4FToVdzn%2BdtCNqJDtkceV0cKJ8CsQXrk%3D=0
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >Andrew Wetmore
>> >
>> 
>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcottage1
>>>4
>> .
>> >blogspot.com%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7C19666b9f52de4eed220408
>> >d563668a33%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C636524214405634774
>> >=MFWkvT%2ByNTI4FToVdzn%2BdtCNqJDtkceV0cKJ8CsQXrk%3D=0
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Carlos Rovira
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cbfc4c02edc284144f87908d5
>6378dd76%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524293117331892
>data=uOkzT8bYhOPPp7wTFitEmsn8v2DVr3I9%2FcXsCftAru0%3D=0

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Alex Harui]

MIT is fine, as is BSD.  But again, if the theme has many parts, it may
result in the PMC spending time researching each of the parts.  Just
because the theme author claims MIT for his work, he might have used
third-party works under other licenses that aren't as compatible with the
Apache License.

I guess my question is this:  I don't expect that the look-and-feel of our
documentation pages needs much if any animation.  IOW, I would think the
visuals around the content will be pretty much static.  If that's the
case, why will it be so difficult to just continue improving the template
I put in there?  If you want to take a theme and WP and mock up something
quickly, that's fine as long as all of the creativity can be considered
yours or under a friendly license.  But maybe instead of another export of
a WP theme, we should just try to mimic that in plain HTML.  I think I got
pretty close to the royale.a.o look in the docpage.html template.

Thoughts?
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 1:57 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Hi Alex,
>
>right, I'm looking for something that is ALv2. Unfortunately almost all
>docs themes are MIT license. Is MIT right for us?
>
>2018-01-24 18:14 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>
>> Hi Carlos,
>>
>> Right now, the master branch is set up to use the Cayman theme.  When I
>> took a quick look at Cayman, it appeared to be under Creative Commons,
>> which makes it very difficult for us to use.  Unfortunately, just
>>because
>> it is "Open Source" and on GitHub doesn't mean it is compatible with the
>> Apache License.  That was one reason I put in a docpage.html as the
>> initial template for the doc site.  If you can find a simple theme that
>> isn't under CC, then let's take a look at it, but every third party
>>theme
>> seems to have lots of pieces and is going to have to get scrubbed which
>> takes us time thinking about legal stuff.  I believe we can
>>incrementally
>> add to the initial template or make different templates over time and
>>make
>> a first-class doc site without having to spend so much time scrubbing
>> other people's works.  I don't think people are going to care too much
>> about how cool our doc site is, at least not right now.  I don't think
>> there is a rush to make it cool.  On the other hand, we do want to make
>>a
>> good first impression over at royale.a.o, which is why I'm glad you have
>> provided something great for that.
>>
>> My 2 cents,
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/24/18, 12:45 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
>>Rovira"
>>  wrote:
>>
>> >Hi Alex, for this reason is better to go with a OS GitHub theme that
>>only
>> >needs to use the colors, fonts and logos from our website. Those where
>> >selected by me and are not provided by the WP theme. The other main
>>reason
>> >is that we need to use something done for that task with the maximum
>> >quality. And that is something we can develop ourselves from scratch
>> >without invest lots of time.
>> >
>> >2018-01-24 5:10 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>> >
>> >> Personally, I would be very cautious about WP themes or copying
>> >> look-and-feel of other sites.  I would like our doc to be
>>license-able
>> >> under ALv2 and not run into IP and licensing issues.
>> >>
>> >> -Alex
>> >>
>> >> On 1/23/18, 3:11 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
>> >>Rovira"
>> >>  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> >I tried to read through this thread, but many mails to catch all
>>whats
>> >> >happening at the moment, and just want to say a couple of things:
>> >> >
>> >> >1.- Regarding TOC, I think it's ok (in a quick review, I should
>>work a
>> >>bit
>> >> >on docs too to see how this works). But as anything, I assume that
>> >>it's a
>> >> >starting point and we should be working on it a evolving it as we
>> >> >experience it.
>> >> >
>> >> >2.- Although Flex doc is a good start I want to point as well to
>> >>React[1]
>> >> >and Angular[2] to compare with what we want to do to get/copy ideas
>>on
>> >>how
>> >> >they are doing things and help to get same level of quality and/or
>>even
>> >> >improve over it. I use to always reference this two projects since
>>are
>> >>the
>> >> >standard right now in any aspect and we should compare what we do
>>with
>> >> >those.
>> >> >
>> >> >React seems to use Github pages as well and the index/menu systems
>> >>seems
>> >> >very appropriate.
>> >> >
>> >> >3.- I think we should use that kind of layout and not try to
>>"emulate"
>> >>the
>> >> >exact look and feel in our site. I think that would not result in
>> >> >something
>> >> >cool in the end. To do that I'll go directly the most easy way that
>>is
>> >>to
>> >> >do it in WP instance in no time. We are trying to use Gihub Pages to
>> >>get
>> >> >something like [2] 

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

On Jan 24, 2018 2:10 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:

Hi, please as NPM is ready, make a new thread a resume all important info
about how many npm packages we have, urls, instructions and all that is
needed so I can add it to the website. Thanks


Will do.

Thanks,
Om


2018-01-24 22:51 GMT+01:00 OmPrakash Muppirala :

> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
> > OK, but I believe the royale-swf package still won't run.  Or are you
> > going to fix that before publishing?
> >
>
> Hmm, fixing it will require a new release, right?  If that is the case, I
> would rather push what we have as is.
> The correct fix can go with the next release.
>
> We might need a couple of such releases to get things right.
>
>
>
> > Please use NPM 5.6.0 so we can use whatever steps you end up using in
the
> > RM script.
> >
>
> Will try that.
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 1/24/18, 1:08 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> Muppirala"
> >  wrote:
> >
> > >I'm going to republish both under the apache royale organization.
> Please
> > >hold off on making any changes till then.
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >Om
> > >
> > >On Jan 24, 2018 12:31 PM, "Alex Harui" 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Interesting.  There might be different rules for Apache Royale since
> our
> > >> repos are under the Apache organization, but if you can get it to
> work,
> > >>I
> > >> think that would be helpful.
> > >>
> > >> -Alex
> > >>
> > >> On 1/24/18, 12:21 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> > >>wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >Ahh Yes!
> > >> >
> > >> >You can do nice release on the GH. We are doing such based on TAG.
> I'm
> > >> >putting in the description links to the release [1]
> > >> >
> > >> >[1]
> > >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > >> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
> > >>
> > >>>m%2Fprominic%2FMoonshine-IDE%2Freleases=02%7C01%7Caharui%
> > 40adobe.co
> > >>>m
> > >> %
> > >> >7C4f0876c2f05f4609fc0408d563680ef3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> > >> cee1%7C0%
> > >> >7C0%7C636524220939419032=WThjkWpxGSPICEBhySb0JJtVJOIKT%
> > >> 2B1wevQ9mi9Kv
> > >> >Lg%3D=0
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >2018-01-24 20:58 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> > >> >
> > >> >> The NPM install name is defined in package.json.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The -bin-js package is JS only, no SWF support.  It's package name
> is
> > >> >> 'royale'.  Turns out there is already a 'royale' out there, so
I've
> > >> >> already changed it to 'apache-royale' in the nightly builds and
for
> > >>the
> > >> >> next release.  Technically, we shouldn't NPM publish this package
> > >>with
> > >> >>its
> > >> >> new name until we've officially released the source file with the
> new
> > >> >>name
> > >> >> in it, but also, technically, binary packages are not official
> > >>releases
> > >> >>of
> > >> >> the ASF.  I think any individual could publish a nightly as
> > >> >>apache-royale,
> > >> >> but I'm not sure it is worth it.  Folks can just use npm install
> > >> > >> >> the package> as I instructed upthread.  If someone wants to put
> that
> > >> >> package some place that isn't mirrored, they can do that as well.
> We
> > >> >> could put it on the CI server, for example.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The -bin-js-swf package contains SWF support and thus it contains
a
> > >>.js
> > >> >> file that downloads the Adobe SDKs.  It looks like that .js file
> > >>needs
> > >> >> fixing so no matter where or how you get at that package, it will
> > >>throw
> > >> >>an
> > >> >> error on installation.  Someone needs to take the time to fix that
> > >>.js
> > >> >> file and then we can discuss whether to publish it or not.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> IMO, we should just tell folks who ask to install the 'royale'
> > >>package
> > >> >>via
> > >> >> the mirrors or maybe put a copy up on another server.  Does GH
> have a
> > >> >> releases folder or something like that?  I hope to start the 0.9.1
> > >> >>release
> > >> >> in 10 to 14 days.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Thoughts?
> > >> >> -Alex
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On 1/24/18, 11:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> > >> >>wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> >I just wanted to say that we shouldn't loose opportunity to show
> > >>that
> > >> >> >release. If npm is not working let's provide simple urls on the
> > >> >>website.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >2018-01-24 19:59 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki
> > >>:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >> If npm is broken and it's require fix in the source I
> understand.
> > >> >>What's
> > >> >> >> with second option ? For this release we could provide on the
> > >> >>website at
> > >> >> >> least links.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Thanks,
> > >> >> >> Piotr
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> 2018-01-24 19:33 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui  >:
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>> I'm not sure 

Re: [DRAFT] [ANNOUNCE] Apache Royale 0.9.0 Released

[Piotr Zarzycki]

I have created release on GitHub - It's unpublished [1] - Do we want to add
something more there ?

[1]
https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/releases/tag/untagged-3e7dc9305c4ad1eaa804

Thanks, Piotr

2018-01-24 23:06 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :

> Hi thanks Alex and Andrew,
>
> right now we are having such moderate impact on internet. For example in
> twitter we have 135 followers, in facebook 40. We have the accounts open
> about 15 days like the website. So we can make huge noise right now. Just
> letting people know we release our first release is great, but we must
> lower expectations about actual Apache Royale state since although the
> technology in in place, to make real apps it's not as friendly as Flex, and
> we don't want people coming get frustrated about that. But this is a
> required step in order to follow up improving royale
>
>
>
>
> 2018-01-24 19:00 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>
> > Tweakage: I would change this passage
> >
> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base into an
> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
> > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
> > handle production needs.
> >
> > to this
> >
> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> > strategies, and and to recruit new contributors. We hope to grow the code
> > base into an
> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity when developing
> > applications that can run on many platforms. Beta releases may not
> > handle production needs.
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Alex Harui 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Please comment on the draft below. Quite frankly, I'm not clear how
> much
> > > noise we want to make about 0.9.0.  Looks like NPM is not working at
> all.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > The Apache Royale community is pleased to announce the release of
> Apache
> > > Royale 0.9.0.
> > >
> > > Apache Royale is a new project that took over the work on what was
> being
> > > called FlexJS, a next-generation of the Apache Flex SDK that enables
> > > developers to use MXML and ActionScript to generated HTML/JS/CSS so
> > > applications can run natively in browsers.  The cross-compiled code can
> > > also be used in Apache Cordova (Adobe PhoneGap) mobile applications.
> > >
> > > (Apache Flex is a highly productive, open source application framework
> > for
> > > building and maintaining expressive applications that deploy on Adobe
> > > Flash and Adobe AIR to provide a consistent experience on all major
> > > browsers, desktops and devices.)
> > >
> > >
> > > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
> > > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> > > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base into
> an
> > > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
> > > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
> > > handle production needs.  Expect lots of bugs and
> > > missing features.  Please file bugs at:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/issues
> > >
> > >
> > > (If you happen to know it is a compiler issue, please use:
> > > https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues)
> > >
> > > For questions about how to use Royale, send email to
> > > us...@royale.apache.org.  For questions and feedback on the
> development
> > of
> > > the source code in the release, send email to dev@royale.apache.org.
> > >
> > > Apache Royale is available in source and binary
> > > form from the Apache mirrors:
> > >
> > > Source:
> > > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > > apache-royale-0.9.0-src.t
> > > ar.gz
> > >
> > > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > > apache-royale-0.9.0-src.z
> > > ip
> > >
> > > Binary:
> > > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > > binaries/apache-royale-0.
> > > 9.0-bin-js.tar.gz
> > > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > > binaries/apache-royale-0.
> > > 9.0-bin-js.zip
> > >
> > > Binary with SWF support:
> > > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > > binaries/apache-royale-0.
> > > 9.0-bin-js-swf.tar.gz
> > > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > > binaries/apache-royale-0.
> > > 9.0-bin-js-swf.zip
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > When downloading from a mirror site, please remember to verify the
> > > downloads using signatures or MD5 hashes.
> > >
> > > Installation via NPM is not working in this release but should be
> working
> > > in the next release.
> > >
> > > See the README for more information. Visit 

Re: Migrating existing FlexJS documentation to Royale

[Carlos Rovira]

Thanks Alex,
I can see it working online :)
I'm trying to test it localy but don't know how to do it.
In order to make the html/css looks good, I need to work localy, please let
me know how yo do it
I installed already ruby, jekyll, etc... and tried to run "bundle exec
jekyll serve" but we don't have Gem file result is:

Could not locate Gemfile or .bundle/ directory

Maybe there's a more easy way to test this.

Carlos


2018-01-19 21:59 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> OK, I got the CSS to load.  You can hit this link:
>
> https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/test/test.html
>
> I'm going to look into automatic TOC generation next.  IMO, we should
> decide what kind of header/footer we want not only for the docs on this
> site, but for ASDoc and Olaf's TryItNow as well and start implementing it.
>  Like this page, it may not look great right away, but we can iterate
> towards making it look good.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 1/19/18, 1:10 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
> >I'm out of time for today, but I tested templates and jekyll and started
> >to get something to work.
> >
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fapache.gi
> >thub.io%2Froyale-docs%2Ftest%2Ftest.html=02%7C01%7Caharui%
> 40adobe.com
> >%7C8d9c2ab112564497fb2608d55f1c7c23%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0
> >%7C0%7C636519498299260185=2egj2BghYos4ur%
> 2FUSpvN4Vrzh8IOj6rPngvyAJe8
> >ZqM%3D=0
> >
> >You can see the test/test.md and _layouts/docpage.html in the royals-docs
> >repo.  The CSS file didn't load for some reason.  Feel free to figure it
> >out or I will look into it tomorrow.
> >
> >HTH,
> >-Alex
> >
> >On 1/18/18, 6:08 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> >
> >>This is for doc, not code so I'm not sure the issue I raised matters.
> >>
> >>That said, I've been reading this [1] and it seems like we should be able
> >>to set up a few templates sort of like we did flex.a.o and not worry so
> >>much about customizing a third-party theme.
> >>
> >>[1]
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fjekyllrb
> >>.
> >>com%2Fdocs=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C6fca45a581614f01bbd008d55e
> >>e
> >>190da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636519245260410634
> >>t
> >>a=SnZeokcfQXRyaHs338A04ENYTLx%2FWSwo42KPSsA3S9k%3D=0
> >>
> >>On 1/18/18, 5:28 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
> >>
> >>>Carlos,
> >>>
> >>>I like your findings jeckyll theme doc.
> >>>
> >>>It looks like we may have again similar issue with license as we have in
> >>>MDLExample.
> >>>
> >>>Can someone raise jira for both cases? Alex raises question on legal
> >>>couple
> >>>of days ago. No responses. Let's not wait block us with it - push things
> >>>forward. Jira could be better to do this.
> >>>
> >>>Thanks,
> >>>Piotr
> >>>
> >>>On Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 02:08 Justin Mclean 
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
>  Hi,
> 
>  > I think this looks very good and seems to be responsive
>  >
>  >
> [1]https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fmist
> i
> c
> 100.github.io%2Fjekyll-bootstrap-doc=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> %
> 7
> C
> 9c168d0de9074f2fc06108d55edbea4f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0
> %
> 7
> C0%7C636519220978547047=cUfWYBGYEBBEd%
> 2FpwSfe9bxwJd6N%2BmnyMC0pK%
> 2
> F
> EepY8o%3D=0
>  > [2]
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub
> .
> c
> om%2Fallejo%2Fjekyll-docs-theme=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> %7C9c1
> 6
> 8
> d0de9074f2fc06108d55edbea4f%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7
> C
> 636519220978547047=hY3xQXdzTO8RFF7COWVNJtd%
> 2BzoXqck04VV68TxcIKFs%
> 3
> D
> =0
> 
>  From a quick look this contains CSS code licensed under CC-BY-3.0
> (looks
>  like it comes from bootstrap docs). That may or may not be an issue,
>  depending on the current conversation around this on legal discuss,
> and
>  what you want to do with it.
> 
>  Thanks,
>  Justin
> >>
> >
>
>


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

Re: Updating 2015 FlexJS presentation

[Andrew Wetmore]

Thank you, Justin!

We should have whenever we ca turn out illustrated talks for the
too-busy-to-read crowd. It makes a huge difference in building project
credibility.

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Justin Mclean 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Was it recorded anywhere? I often use autosub [1] and Aegisub [2] to
> generate captions from talks.
>
> The talks at the FlexJS summit were recorded and might be useful [3][4]
>
> Justin
>
> 1. https://github.com/agermanidis/autosub
> 2. http://www.aegisub.org
> 3. https://us.apacheflexjs.org
> 4. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4EsaSA9xpnnraJX7NzpX6eh_
> P95RO8Pj




-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Directory and File naming conventions

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi, I see you work in develop thought GitHub with .md files. I can see as
well .css with website fonts. But I don't know how to see the generated
site.
Can someone explain me how to see the final html content resulting from
apply the css to the markdown files?

Thanks

2018-01-24 22:13 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> OK, I'm done playing in the Welcome folder.  The third-tier TOC seems to
> be working.
>
> I am moving on to the CreateAnApplication folder.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 12:10 PM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
>
> >I should have added that I will go edit out the hyphens in the front
> >matter.
> >
> >On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Andrew Wetmore 
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Let's give it a try.
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Alex Harui 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 1/24/18, 9:59 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >Hi Andrew,
> >>> >
> >>> >Thanks for doing the research.  I didn't even think about "-".  That
> >>> seems
> >>> >like a good idea to me.
> >>>
> >>> Speaking of '-', I saw in your recent commit that the Front Matter
> >>>title
> >>> had '-' in it.  That title becomes the  so I don't
> >>> think that should have '-' in it.  I think it can use plain spaces and
> >>> doesn't need escaping.  I don't think it is used to resolve links.
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>> -Alex
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andrew Wetmore
> >>
> >>
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14
> >>.blogspot.com%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C19666b9f52de4eed2204
> >>08d563668a33%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524214405634
> >>774=MFWkvT%2ByNTI4FToVdzn%2BdtCNqJDtkceV0cKJ8CsQXrk%3D=0
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >--
> >Andrew Wetmore
> >
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14
> .
> >blogspot.com%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C19666b9f52de4eed220408
> >d563668a33%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636524214405634774
> >=MFWkvT%2ByNTI4FToVdzn%2BdtCNqJDtkceV0cKJ8CsQXrk%3D=0
>
>


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

Re: Updating 2015 FlexJS presentation

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

Was it recorded anywhere? I often use autosub [1] and Aegisub [2] to generate 
captions from talks.

The talks at the FlexJS summit were recorded and might be useful [3][4]

Justin

1. https://github.com/agermanidis/autosub
2. http://www.aegisub.org
3. https://us.apacheflexjs.org
4. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4EsaSA9xpnnraJX7NzpX6eh_P95RO8Pj

Re: Updating 2015 FlexJS presentation

[Andrew Wetmore]

Thank you, Om.

Quick question: the slides refer to several FlexJS examples. Are they still
running? Will they eventually migrate to Royale versions?

I am tempted to make a first migration of this slide deck with the
substance but without the links to the examples. Then, when we have
examples running in Royale versions, I would update the presentation.

I will have other questions about how two years of development may have
affected the texts...

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 6:03 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
wrote:

> Andrew,
>
> Please feel free to take this presentation and modify it.  I have made the
> original ppt file available here:
> https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/FPveqBSWJ5PiXXYkbSslIC36LLVgMY
> sHg8UUNHEV2c
>
> I don't have a presentation script (I just winged it :-D)  But I would
> guess that by the time you make your changes, you might want to get
> yourself a new script.
>
> Glad to help in any way, just let me know.
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Andrew Wetmore 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi:
> >
> > Om presented this slide deck at ApacheCon in 2015 [1]. The FlexJS help
> docs
> > refer to it, and I wondered if it would be worth updating for current use
> > with Royale.
> >
> > I would be happy to do the grunt work of updating the slides if someone
> can
> > provide the PowerPoint. Do we have a place to host such things?
> >
> > Oh, was there a presentation script with this? If it is written out, I
> > would be glad to record it and turn it and the PowerPoint into a little
> > video we could post (and host) on YouTube. I do a lot of voice work for
> > various companies and record audio and assemble videos for them in my own
> > studio.
> >
> > a
> >
> >
> > [1]
> > https://events.static.linuxfound.org/sites/events/
> > files/slides/FlexJS_ApacheCon_2015.pdf
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Wetmore
> >
> > http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
> >
>



-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi, please as NPM is ready, make a new thread a resume all important info
about how many npm packages we have, urls, instructions and all that is
needed so I can add it to the website. Thanks

2018-01-24 22:51 GMT+01:00 OmPrakash Muppirala :

> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
> > OK, but I believe the royale-swf package still won't run.  Or are you
> > going to fix that before publishing?
> >
>
> Hmm, fixing it will require a new release, right?  If that is the case, I
> would rather push what we have as is.
> The correct fix can go with the next release.
>
> We might need a couple of such releases to get things right.
>
>
>
> > Please use NPM 5.6.0 so we can use whatever steps you end up using in the
> > RM script.
> >
>
> Will try that.
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 1/24/18, 1:08 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> Muppirala"
> >  wrote:
> >
> > >I'm going to republish both under the apache royale organization.
> Please
> > >hold off on making any changes till then.
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >Om
> > >
> > >On Jan 24, 2018 12:31 PM, "Alex Harui" 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Interesting.  There might be different rules for Apache Royale since
> our
> > >> repos are under the Apache organization, but if you can get it to
> work,
> > >>I
> > >> think that would be helpful.
> > >>
> > >> -Alex
> > >>
> > >> On 1/24/18, 12:21 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> > >>wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >Ahh Yes!
> > >> >
> > >> >You can do nice release on the GH. We are doing such based on TAG.
> I'm
> > >> >putting in the description links to the release [1]
> > >> >
> > >> >[1]
> > >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> > >> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
> > >>
> > >>>m%2Fprominic%2FMoonshine-IDE%2Freleases=02%7C01%7Caharui%
> > 40adobe.co
> > >>>m
> > >> %
> > >> >7C4f0876c2f05f4609fc0408d563680ef3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> > >> cee1%7C0%
> > >> >7C0%7C636524220939419032=WThjkWpxGSPICEBhySb0JJtVJOIKT%
> > >> 2B1wevQ9mi9Kv
> > >> >Lg%3D=0
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >2018-01-24 20:58 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> > >> >
> > >> >> The NPM install name is defined in package.json.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The -bin-js package is JS only, no SWF support.  It's package name
> is
> > >> >> 'royale'.  Turns out there is already a 'royale' out there, so I've
> > >> >> already changed it to 'apache-royale' in the nightly builds and for
> > >>the
> > >> >> next release.  Technically, we shouldn't NPM publish this package
> > >>with
> > >> >>its
> > >> >> new name until we've officially released the source file with the
> new
> > >> >>name
> > >> >> in it, but also, technically, binary packages are not official
> > >>releases
> > >> >>of
> > >> >> the ASF.  I think any individual could publish a nightly as
> > >> >>apache-royale,
> > >> >> but I'm not sure it is worth it.  Folks can just use npm install
> > >> > >> >> the package> as I instructed upthread.  If someone wants to put
> that
> > >> >> package some place that isn't mirrored, they can do that as well.
> We
> > >> >> could put it on the CI server, for example.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The -bin-js-swf package contains SWF support and thus it contains a
> > >>.js
> > >> >> file that downloads the Adobe SDKs.  It looks like that .js file
> > >>needs
> > >> >> fixing so no matter where or how you get at that package, it will
> > >>throw
> > >> >>an
> > >> >> error on installation.  Someone needs to take the time to fix that
> > >>.js
> > >> >> file and then we can discuss whether to publish it or not.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> IMO, we should just tell folks who ask to install the 'royale'
> > >>package
> > >> >>via
> > >> >> the mirrors or maybe put a copy up on another server.  Does GH
> have a
> > >> >> releases folder or something like that?  I hope to start the 0.9.1
> > >> >>release
> > >> >> in 10 to 14 days.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Thoughts?
> > >> >> -Alex
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On 1/24/18, 11:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> > >> >>wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> >I just wanted to say that we shouldn't loose opportunity to show
> > >>that
> > >> >> >release. If npm is not working let's provide simple urls on the
> > >> >>website.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >2018-01-24 19:59 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki
> > >>:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >> If npm is broken and it's require fix in the source I
> understand.
> > >> >>What's
> > >> >> >> with second option ? For this release we could provide on the
> > >> >>website at
> > >> >> >> least links.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Thanks,
> > >> >> >> Piotr
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> 2018-01-24 19:33 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui  >:
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >>> I'm not sure how to fix the npm issues without changing a
> source
> > >> >>file.
> > >> >> >>>  Any ideas?
> > 

Re: [DRAFT] [ANNOUNCE] Apache Royale 0.9.0 Released

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi thanks Alex and Andrew,

right now we are having such moderate impact on internet. For example in
twitter we have 135 followers, in facebook 40. We have the accounts open
about 15 days like the website. So we can make huge noise right now. Just
letting people know we release our first release is great, but we must
lower expectations about actual Apache Royale state since although the
technology in in place, to make real apps it's not as friendly as Flex, and
we don't want people coming get frustrated about that. But this is a
required step in order to follow up improving royale




2018-01-24 19:00 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :

> Tweakage: I would change this passage
>
> This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
> release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base into an
> SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
> applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
> handle production needs.
>
> to this
>
> This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
> release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> strategies, and and to recruit new contributors. We hope to grow the code
> base into an
> SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity when developing
> applications that can run on many platforms. Beta releases may not
> handle production needs.
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
> > Please comment on the draft below. Quite frankly, I'm not clear how much
> > noise we want to make about 0.9.0.  Looks like NPM is not working at all.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > -Alex
> >
> > ---
> >
> > The Apache Royale community is pleased to announce the release of Apache
> > Royale 0.9.0.
> >
> > Apache Royale is a new project that took over the work on what was being
> > called FlexJS, a next-generation of the Apache Flex SDK that enables
> > developers to use MXML and ActionScript to generated HTML/JS/CSS so
> > applications can run natively in browsers.  The cross-compiled code can
> > also be used in Apache Cordova (Adobe PhoneGap) mobile applications.
> >
> > (Apache Flex is a highly productive, open source application framework
> for
> > building and maintaining expressive applications that deploy on Adobe
> > Flash and Adobe AIR to provide a consistent experience on all major
> > browsers, desktops and devices.)
> >
> >
> > This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
> > release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> > strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base into an
> > SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
> > applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
> > handle production needs.  Expect lots of bugs and
> > missing features.  Please file bugs at:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/issues
> >
> >
> > (If you happen to know it is a compiler issue, please use:
> > https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues)
> >
> > For questions about how to use Royale, send email to
> > us...@royale.apache.org.  For questions and feedback on the development
> of
> > the source code in the release, send email to dev@royale.apache.org.
> >
> > Apache Royale is available in source and binary
> > form from the Apache mirrors:
> >
> > Source:
> > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > apache-royale-0.9.0-src.t
> > ar.gz
> >
> > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > apache-royale-0.9.0-src.z
> > ip
> >
> > Binary:
> > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > binaries/apache-royale-0.
> > 9.0-bin-js.tar.gz
> > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > binaries/apache-royale-0.
> > 9.0-bin-js.zip
> >
> > Binary with SWF support:
> > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > binaries/apache-royale-0.
> > 9.0-bin-js-swf.tar.gz
> > http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> > binaries/apache-royale-0.
> > 9.0-bin-js-swf.zip
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > When downloading from a mirror site, please remember to verify the
> > downloads using signatures or MD5 hashes.
> >
> > Installation via NPM is not working in this release but should be working
> > in the next release.
> >
> > See the README for more information. Visit http://royale.apache.org/ for
> > links to other resources.
> >
> > Please try Royale and become involved in shaping the future of
> application
> > development.
> >
> > The Apache Royale Community
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Andrew Wetmore
>
> http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
>



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

Re: Updating 2015 FlexJS presentation

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

Andrew,

Please feel free to take this presentation and modify it.  I have made the
original ppt file available here:
https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/FPveqBSWJ5PiXXYkbSslIC36LLVgMYsHg8UUNHEV2c

I don't have a presentation script (I just winged it :-D)  But I would
guess that by the time you make your changes, you might want to get
yourself a new script.

Glad to help in any way, just let me know.

Thanks,
Om

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 12:09 PM, Andrew Wetmore 
wrote:

> Hi:
>
> Om presented this slide deck at ApacheCon in 2015 [1]. The FlexJS help docs
> refer to it, and I wondered if it would be worth updating for current use
> with Royale.
>
> I would be happy to do the grunt work of updating the slides if someone can
> provide the PowerPoint. Do we have a place to host such things?
>
> Oh, was there a presentation script with this? If it is written out, I
> would be glad to record it and turn it and the PowerPoint into a little
> video we could post (and host) on YouTube. I do a lot of voice work for
> various companies and record audio and assemble videos for them in my own
> studio.
>
> a
>
>
> [1]
> https://events.static.linuxfound.org/sites/events/
> files/slides/FlexJS_ApacheCon_2015.pdf
>
> --
> Andrew Wetmore
>
> http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
>

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Alex,

right, I'm looking for something that is ALv2. Unfortunately almost all
docs themes are MIT license. Is MIT right for us?

2018-01-24 18:14 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> Hi Carlos,
>
> Right now, the master branch is set up to use the Cayman theme.  When I
> took a quick look at Cayman, it appeared to be under Creative Commons,
> which makes it very difficult for us to use.  Unfortunately, just because
> it is "Open Source" and on GitHub doesn't mean it is compatible with the
> Apache License.  That was one reason I put in a docpage.html as the
> initial template for the doc site.  If you can find a simple theme that
> isn't under CC, then let's take a look at it, but every third party theme
> seems to have lots of pieces and is going to have to get scrubbed which
> takes us time thinking about legal stuff.  I believe we can incrementally
> add to the initial template or make different templates over time and make
> a first-class doc site without having to spend so much time scrubbing
> other people's works.  I don't think people are going to care too much
> about how cool our doc site is, at least not right now.  I don't think
> there is a rush to make it cool.  On the other hand, we do want to make a
> good first impression over at royale.a.o, which is why I'm glad you have
> provided something great for that.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 12:45 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
>  wrote:
>
> >Hi Alex, for this reason is better to go with a OS GitHub theme that only
> >needs to use the colors, fonts and logos from our website. Those where
> >selected by me and are not provided by the WP theme. The other main reason
> >is that we need to use something done for that task with the maximum
> >quality. And that is something we can develop ourselves from scratch
> >without invest lots of time.
> >
> >2018-01-24 5:10 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >
> >> Personally, I would be very cautious about WP themes or copying
> >> look-and-feel of other sites.  I would like our doc to be license-able
> >> under ALv2 and not run into IP and licensing issues.
> >>
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 1/23/18, 3:11 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
> >>Rovira"
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi,
> >> >
> >> >I tried to read through this thread, but many mails to catch all whats
> >> >happening at the moment, and just want to say a couple of things:
> >> >
> >> >1.- Regarding TOC, I think it's ok (in a quick review, I should work a
> >>bit
> >> >on docs too to see how this works). But as anything, I assume that
> >>it's a
> >> >starting point and we should be working on it a evolving it as we
> >> >experience it.
> >> >
> >> >2.- Although Flex doc is a good start I want to point as well to
> >>React[1]
> >> >and Angular[2] to compare with what we want to do to get/copy ideas on
> >>how
> >> >they are doing things and help to get same level of quality and/or even
> >> >improve over it. I use to always reference this two projects since are
> >>the
> >> >standard right now in any aspect and we should compare what we do with
> >> >those.
> >> >
> >> >React seems to use Github pages as well and the index/menu systems
> >>seems
> >> >very appropriate.
> >> >
> >> >3.- I think we should use that kind of layout and not try to "emulate"
> >>the
> >> >exact look and feel in our site. I think that would not result in
> >> >something
> >> >cool in the end. To do that I'll go directly the most easy way that is
> >>to
> >> >do it in WP instance in no time. We are trying to use Gihub Pages to
> >>get
> >> >something like [2] and that's done with a GitHub pages documentation
> >> >already done. With that in place we only need to change some colors (to
> >> >oranges and blues) and fonts, and add royale logo to match website, but
> >> >getting something unique for our docs.
> >> >
> >> >Hope to get soon to this and could help in this task.
> >> >
> >> >Thanks
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >[1]
> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> https%3A%2F%2Freactjs.o
> >> >rg%2Fdocs%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> 7Cb2e14e4d2a974d55307108d56
> >> >2b6bb97%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> 7C636523459331863020
> >> >ata=eJA6clo4TdLGQqSA2KQf400woq2tw0%2BLq%2F0Di8eCnDc%3D=0
> >> >[2]
> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> https%3A%2F%2Fangular.i
> >>
> >>>o%2Fdocs=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cb2e14e4d2a974d55307108d562b
> >>>6
> >> b
> >> >b97%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> 7C636523459331863020=
> >> >ESznd%2FS49ExgogHbPN9HIF%2B4iHI%2FxwX5Tqw4xnndkSQ%3D=0
> >> >
> >> >2018-01-23 22:30 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
> >> >
> >> >> I have set up 2FA and presume I have to wait a while until GitHub
> >> >>notices.
> >> >> In the mean time I may create another page 

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:15 PM, Alex Harui 
wrote:

> OK, but I believe the royale-swf package still won't run.  Or are you
> going to fix that before publishing?
>

Hmm, fixing it will require a new release, right?  If that is the case, I
would rather push what we have as is.
The correct fix can go with the next release.

We might need a couple of such releases to get things right.



> Please use NPM 5.6.0 so we can use whatever steps you end up using in the
> RM script.
>

Will try that.

Thanks,
Om



>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 1:08 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
>  wrote:
>
> >I'm going to republish both under the apache royale organization.  Please
> >hold off on making any changes till then.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Om
> >
> >On Jan 24, 2018 12:31 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> >
> >> Interesting.  There might be different rules for Apache Royale since our
> >> repos are under the Apache organization, but if you can get it to work,
> >>I
> >> think that would be helpful.
> >>
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 1/24/18, 12:21 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> >Ahh Yes!
> >> >
> >> >You can do nice release on the GH. We are doing such based on TAG. I'm
> >> >putting in the description links to the release [1]
> >> >
> >> >[1]
> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
> >>
> >>>m%2Fprominic%2FMoonshine-IDE%2Freleases=02%7C01%7Caharui%
> 40adobe.co
> >>>m
> >> %
> >> >7C4f0876c2f05f4609fc0408d563680ef3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> >> cee1%7C0%
> >> >7C0%7C636524220939419032=WThjkWpxGSPICEBhySb0JJtVJOIKT%
> >> 2B1wevQ9mi9Kv
> >> >Lg%3D=0
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >2018-01-24 20:58 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >> >
> >> >> The NPM install name is defined in package.json.
> >> >>
> >> >> The -bin-js package is JS only, no SWF support.  It's package name is
> >> >> 'royale'.  Turns out there is already a 'royale' out there, so I've
> >> >> already changed it to 'apache-royale' in the nightly builds and for
> >>the
> >> >> next release.  Technically, we shouldn't NPM publish this package
> >>with
> >> >>its
> >> >> new name until we've officially released the source file with the new
> >> >>name
> >> >> in it, but also, technically, binary packages are not official
> >>releases
> >> >>of
> >> >> the ASF.  I think any individual could publish a nightly as
> >> >>apache-royale,
> >> >> but I'm not sure it is worth it.  Folks can just use npm install
> >> >> >> the package> as I instructed upthread.  If someone wants to put that
> >> >> package some place that isn't mirrored, they can do that as well.  We
> >> >> could put it on the CI server, for example.
> >> >>
> >> >> The -bin-js-swf package contains SWF support and thus it contains a
> >>.js
> >> >> file that downloads the Adobe SDKs.  It looks like that .js file
> >>needs
> >> >> fixing so no matter where or how you get at that package, it will
> >>throw
> >> >>an
> >> >> error on installation.  Someone needs to take the time to fix that
> >>.js
> >> >> file and then we can discuss whether to publish it or not.
> >> >>
> >> >> IMO, we should just tell folks who ask to install the 'royale'
> >>package
> >> >>via
> >> >> the mirrors or maybe put a copy up on another server.  Does GH have a
> >> >> releases folder or something like that?  I hope to start the 0.9.1
> >> >>release
> >> >> in 10 to 14 days.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thoughts?
> >> >> -Alex
> >> >>
> >> >> On 1/24/18, 11:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> >> >>wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >I just wanted to say that we shouldn't loose opportunity to show
> >>that
> >> >> >release. If npm is not working let's provide simple urls on the
> >> >>website.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >2018-01-24 19:59 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki
> >>:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> If npm is broken and it's require fix in the source I understand.
> >> >>What's
> >> >> >> with second option ? For this release we could provide on the
> >> >>website at
> >> >> >> least links.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> >> Piotr
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 2018-01-24 19:33 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>> I'm not sure how to fix the npm issues without changing a source
> >> >>file.
> >> >> >>>  Any ideas?
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Get Outlook for
> >> >>
> >>
> >>>Android com/?url=https%3A%
> >>>2F%2Fna01.safelinks.protection.outlook=02%
> 7C01%7Caharui%40adobe
> >>>.com%7C9f94ce4974d442d5d62008d5636ea830%
> 7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178
> >>>decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524249282687049=
> 8Km8DMHggeDksyAoPbhx7p0hEZ
> >>>8uDYWLtS2IAZc2nic%3D=0.
> >> com/?url=https%3A%2F
> >> >%2Fna01.safelinks.protection.outlook=02%7C01%7Caharui%
> >> 40adobe.com
> >> 

Re: Different results for compilation Error in JS and SWF compilation

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Ok now I understand! I will look into that :)

2018-01-24 21:40 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> I'm saying that if you want JSRoyale to have the same output as the SWF
> target, I would look at the compiler source in those files and see if they
> are doing something different.  I could go fix it myself, but I am trying
> to encourage other committers to get more familiar with the compiler
> source.
>
> HTH,
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 12:37 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>
> >Not sure what do you mean ? That's how we use it I think so.
> >
> >2018-01-24 21:28 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >
> >> Interesting.  Hadn't noticed that.  I guess you could compare the output
> >> logic in the compilers.  MXMLC.java should be used for SWF compiles and
> >> MXMLJSC.java for JS compiles.
> >>
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 1/24/18, 11:59 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> >Once Again:
> >> >
> >> >JSRoyale:
> >> >col: 12 This attribute is unexpected. It will be ignored.
> >> >:
> >> >: 
> >> >
> >> >SWF:
> >> >col: 12 Error: This attribute is unexpected. It will be ignored.
> >> >:
> >> >: 
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >2018-01-24 20:47 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >> >
> >> >> Links are still broken.  Paste.a.o might be having problems.  Try
> >>just
> >> >>cut
> >> >> and paste of a section of the main differences.
> >> >>
> >> >> -Alex
> >> >>
> >> >> On 1/24/18, 10:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> >> >>wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Something happened with Apache paste. Posting once again.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >JSRoyale compilation error [1]
> >> >> >SWF compilation error [2]
> >> >> >
> >> >> >[1]
> >> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
> >> >> >che.org%2FJdNf=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> >> 7Cafcc22074376430e972508d
> >> >> >5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> >> 7C636524147998979848&
> >> >> >sdata=11pnBHmUDQhSfiCfYIsbBw9G1n8vPfwEoAP09onRP14%3D=0
> >> >> >[2]
> >> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
> >> >> >che.org%2FQgUo=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> >> 7Cafcc22074376430e972508d
> >> >> >5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> >> 7C636524147998979848&
> >> >> >sdata=EcK0PgVPJWOa9YxQcvP6LbIbFZ32hNK6pjgsN695lxE%3D=0
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >2018-01-24 18:22 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> The links do not work for me.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> -Alex
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On 1/24/18, 4:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >Carlos,
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >I know what causes the error :) I just wanted to know why the
> >> >>message
> >> >> >> >provided by compiler is different :)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Piotr
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >2018-01-24 13:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira
> >>:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> there's a need for a final "h" here percentWidt
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> so it seems something is wrong in the generation right?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> 2018-01-24 13:08 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki
> >> >> >>:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > I have found that during SWF only compilation and JS only
> >> >>although
> >> >> >>I'm
> >> >> >> >> > getting the same errors they are reported a bit differently.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > In build: compiler.targets=JSRoyale I got [1]
> >> >> >> >> > In build: compiler.targets=SWF I got [2]
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > There is no word "Error" in case of JSRoyale - Is this a bug
> >>?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > [1]
> >> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
> >> >> >> >>ache.org%2FH7m7=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> >> >> 7C86539a854146402e21510
> >> >> >> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> >> >> 7C6365239319247711
> >> >> >>
> 78=I0RlFQKtU8QJ48nFi3Zv6e9gmrVHfTqUiCD0rHxOfYs%3D=0
> >> >> >> >> > [2]
> >> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
> >> >> >> >>ache.org%2FtvL9=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> >> >> 7C86539a854146402e21510
> >> >> >> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> >> >> 7C6365239319247711
> >> >> >>
> 78=3SB0VZjSQ3cq15PMeNK9hDtVEf2IQ2W76uM0jVyyiXo%3D=0
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Thanks,
> >> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Piotr Zarzycki
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Patreon:
> >> >> >> >>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
> >> >> >> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> >> >> >> %7C86539a854146
> >> >> >> >>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> >> >> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
> >> >> 

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[Alex Harui]

OK, but I believe the royale-swf package still won't run.  Or are you
going to fix that before publishing?

Please use NPM 5.6.0 so we can use whatever steps you end up using in the
RM script.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 1:08 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
 wrote:

>I'm going to republish both under the apache royale organization.  Please
>hold off on making any changes till then.
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>On Jan 24, 2018 12:31 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
>> Interesting.  There might be different rules for Apache Royale since our
>> repos are under the Apache organization, but if you can get it to work,
>>I
>> think that would be helpful.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/24/18, 12:21 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
>>wrote:
>>
>> >Ahh Yes!
>> >
>> >You can do nice release on the GH. We are doing such based on TAG. I'm
>> >putting in the description links to the release [1]
>> >
>> >[1]
>> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
>> 
>>>m%2Fprominic%2FMoonshine-IDE%2Freleases=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.co
>>>m
>> %
>> >7C4f0876c2f05f4609fc0408d563680ef3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%
>> >7C0%7C636524220939419032=WThjkWpxGSPICEBhySb0JJtVJOIKT%
>> 2B1wevQ9mi9Kv
>> >Lg%3D=0
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >2018-01-24 20:58 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>> >
>> >> The NPM install name is defined in package.json.
>> >>
>> >> The -bin-js package is JS only, no SWF support.  It's package name is
>> >> 'royale'.  Turns out there is already a 'royale' out there, so I've
>> >> already changed it to 'apache-royale' in the nightly builds and for
>>the
>> >> next release.  Technically, we shouldn't NPM publish this package
>>with
>> >>its
>> >> new name until we've officially released the source file with the new
>> >>name
>> >> in it, but also, technically, binary packages are not official
>>releases
>> >>of
>> >> the ASF.  I think any individual could publish a nightly as
>> >>apache-royale,
>> >> but I'm not sure it is worth it.  Folks can just use npm install
>>> >> the package> as I instructed upthread.  If someone wants to put that
>> >> package some place that isn't mirrored, they can do that as well.  We
>> >> could put it on the CI server, for example.
>> >>
>> >> The -bin-js-swf package contains SWF support and thus it contains a
>>.js
>> >> file that downloads the Adobe SDKs.  It looks like that .js file
>>needs
>> >> fixing so no matter where or how you get at that package, it will
>>throw
>> >>an
>> >> error on installation.  Someone needs to take the time to fix that
>>.js
>> >> file and then we can discuss whether to publish it or not.
>> >>
>> >> IMO, we should just tell folks who ask to install the 'royale'
>>package
>> >>via
>> >> the mirrors or maybe put a copy up on another server.  Does GH have a
>> >> releases folder or something like that?  I hope to start the 0.9.1
>> >>release
>> >> in 10 to 14 days.
>> >>
>> >> Thoughts?
>> >> -Alex
>> >>
>> >> On 1/24/18, 11:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
>> >>wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >I just wanted to say that we shouldn't loose opportunity to show
>>that
>> >> >release. If npm is not working let's provide simple urls on the
>> >>website.
>> >> >
>> >> >2018-01-24 19:59 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki
>>:
>> >> >
>> >> >> If npm is broken and it's require fix in the source I understand.
>> >>What's
>> >> >> with second option ? For this release we could provide on the
>> >>website at
>> >> >> least links.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks,
>> >> >> Piotr
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2018-01-24 19:33 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I'm not sure how to fix the npm issues without changing a source
>> >>file.
>> >> >>>  Any ideas?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Get Outlook for
>> >>
>> 
>>>Android>>2F%2Fna01.safelinks.protection.outlook=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe
>>>.com%7C9f94ce4974d442d5d62008d5636ea830%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178
>>>decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524249282687049=8Km8DMHggeDksyAoPbhx7p0hEZ
>>>8uDYWLtS2IAZc2nic%3D=0.
>> com/?url=https%3A%2F
>> >%2Fna01.safelinks.protection.outlook=02%7C01%7Caharui%
>> 40adobe.com
>> >%7C4f0876c2f05f4609fc0408d563680ef3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1
>> >%7C0%7C0%7C636524220939419032=Q2ckBrKyA%
>> 2BPcM9J7bsJskhw14m2ynBTr
>> >ue3SuHD6QCI%3D=0.
>> >> com/?url=https%3A%2F%2
>> >> >>>Faka.ms%2Fghei36=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> 7Cdec5bceb963f427bfce
>> >> >>>308d56362f69d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365241990598
>> >>
>> >71558=Ck0YuGPpWIOI8OtZcmmk5bSdqlkdf2
>> 09IgzgXGZhvL4%3D=0>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> 
>> >> >>> From: Piotr Zarzycki 
>> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 10:17:12 AM
>> >> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
>> >> >>> 

Re: Directory and File naming conventions

[Alex Harui]

OK, I'm done playing in the Welcome folder.  The third-tier TOC seems to
be working.

I am moving on to the CreateAnApplication folder.

-Alex

On 1/24/18, 12:10 PM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:

>I should have added that I will go edit out the hyphens in the front
>matter.
>
>On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Andrew Wetmore 
>wrote:
>
>> Let's give it a try.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 4:04 PM, Alex Harui 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/24/18, 9:59 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>>>
>>> >Hi Andrew,
>>> >
>>> >Thanks for doing the research.  I didn't even think about "-".  That
>>> seems
>>> >like a good idea to me.
>>>
>>> Speaking of '-', I saw in your recent commit that the Front Matter
>>>title
>>> had '-' in it.  That title becomes the  so I don't
>>> think that should have '-' in it.  I think it can use plain spaces and
>>> doesn't need escaping.  I don't think it is used to resolve links.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andrew Wetmore
>>
>> 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14
>>.blogspot.com%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C19666b9f52de4eed2204
>>08d563668a33%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524214405634
>>774=MFWkvT%2ByNTI4FToVdzn%2BdtCNqJDtkceV0cKJ8CsQXrk%3D=0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>Andrew Wetmore
>
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14.
>blogspot.com%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C19666b9f52de4eed220408
>d563668a33%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524214405634774
>=MFWkvT%2ByNTI4FToVdzn%2BdtCNqJDtkceV0cKJ8CsQXrk%3D=0

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[OmPrakash Muppirala]

I'm going to republish both under the apache royale organization.  Please
hold off on making any changes till then.

Thanks,
Om

On Jan 24, 2018 12:31 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:

> Interesting.  There might be different rules for Apache Royale since our
> repos are under the Apache organization, but if you can get it to work, I
> think that would be helpful.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 12:21 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>
> >Ahh Yes!
> >
> >You can do nice release on the GH. We are doing such based on TAG. I'm
> >putting in the description links to the release [1]
> >
> >[1]
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
> >m%2Fprominic%2FMoonshine-IDE%2Freleases=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> %
> >7C4f0876c2f05f4609fc0408d563680ef3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%
> >7C0%7C636524220939419032=WThjkWpxGSPICEBhySb0JJtVJOIKT%
> 2B1wevQ9mi9Kv
> >Lg%3D=0
> >
> >
> >
> >2018-01-24 20:58 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >
> >> The NPM install name is defined in package.json.
> >>
> >> The -bin-js package is JS only, no SWF support.  It's package name is
> >> 'royale'.  Turns out there is already a 'royale' out there, so I've
> >> already changed it to 'apache-royale' in the nightly builds and for the
> >> next release.  Technically, we shouldn't NPM publish this package with
> >>its
> >> new name until we've officially released the source file with the new
> >>name
> >> in it, but also, technically, binary packages are not official releases
> >>of
> >> the ASF.  I think any individual could publish a nightly as
> >>apache-royale,
> >> but I'm not sure it is worth it.  Folks can just use npm install  >> the package> as I instructed upthread.  If someone wants to put that
> >> package some place that isn't mirrored, they can do that as well.  We
> >> could put it on the CI server, for example.
> >>
> >> The -bin-js-swf package contains SWF support and thus it contains a .js
> >> file that downloads the Adobe SDKs.  It looks like that .js file needs
> >> fixing so no matter where or how you get at that package, it will throw
> >>an
> >> error on installation.  Someone needs to take the time to fix that .js
> >> file and then we can discuss whether to publish it or not.
> >>
> >> IMO, we should just tell folks who ask to install the 'royale' package
> >>via
> >> the mirrors or maybe put a copy up on another server.  Does GH have a
> >> releases folder or something like that?  I hope to start the 0.9.1
> >>release
> >> in 10 to 14 days.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 1/24/18, 11:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> >I just wanted to say that we shouldn't loose opportunity to show that
> >> >release. If npm is not working let's provide simple urls on the
> >>website.
> >> >
> >> >2018-01-24 19:59 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki :
> >> >
> >> >> If npm is broken and it's require fix in the source I understand.
> >>What's
> >> >> with second option ? For this release we could provide on the
> >>website at
> >> >> least links.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Piotr
> >> >>
> >> >> 2018-01-24 19:33 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >> >>
> >> >>> I'm not sure how to fix the npm issues without changing a source
> >>file.
> >> >>>  Any ideas?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Get Outlook for
> >>
> >Android com/?url=https%3A%2F
> >%2Fna01.safelinks.protection.outlook=02%7C01%7Caharui%
> 40adobe.com
> >%7C4f0876c2f05f4609fc0408d563680ef3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1
> >%7C0%7C0%7C636524220939419032=Q2ckBrKyA%
> 2BPcM9J7bsJskhw14m2ynBTr
> >ue3SuHD6QCI%3D=0.
> >> com/?url=https%3A%2F%2
> >> >>>Faka.ms%2Fghei36=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> 7Cdec5bceb963f427bfce
> >> >>>308d56362f69d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365241990598
> >>
> >71558=Ck0YuGPpWIOI8OtZcmmk5bSdqlkdf2
> 09IgzgXGZhvL4%3D=0>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> From: Piotr Zarzycki 
> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 10:17:12 AM
> >> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
> >> >>> Subject: Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Alex,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Can we republish once again everything ? If not can we upload
> >>binaries
> >> >>>to
> >> >>> Apache mirrors[1] as we had this with Flex ?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> [1]
> >> >>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%
> >> >>> 2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Fdyn%2Fcloser.lua%2Fflex%2F4.16.1%
> >> >>> 2Fbinaries%2Fapache-flex-sdk-4.16.1-bin.zip=02%7C01%
> >> >>> 7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1faec7dcd0424ee4086108d56356b4c6%7Cfa
> >> >>> 7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524146406190877&
> >> >>> sdata=KS5MwWOTANwoaf9iihN2CBWFtTfOgUKfNBRMr5qb%2Blc%3D=0
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> Piotr
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 2018-01-24 19:11 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui 

Re: Different results for compilation Error in JS and SWF compilation

[Alex Harui]

I'm saying that if you want JSRoyale to have the same output as the SWF
target, I would look at the compiler source in those files and see if they
are doing something different.  I could go fix it myself, but I am trying
to encourage other committers to get more familiar with the compiler
source.

HTH,
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 12:37 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

>Not sure what do you mean ? That's how we use it I think so.
>
>2018-01-24 21:28 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>
>> Interesting.  Hadn't noticed that.  I guess you could compare the output
>> logic in the compilers.  MXMLC.java should be used for SWF compiles and
>> MXMLJSC.java for JS compiles.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/24/18, 11:59 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
>>wrote:
>>
>> >Once Again:
>> >
>> >JSRoyale:
>> >col: 12 This attribute is unexpected. It will be ignored.
>> >:
>> >: 
>> >
>> >SWF:
>> >col: 12 Error: This attribute is unexpected. It will be ignored.
>> >:
>> >: 
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >2018-01-24 20:47 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>> >
>> >> Links are still broken.  Paste.a.o might be having problems.  Try
>>just
>> >>cut
>> >> and paste of a section of the main differences.
>> >>
>> >> -Alex
>> >>
>> >> On 1/24/18, 10:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
>> >>wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Something happened with Apache paste. Posting once again.
>> >> >
>> >> >JSRoyale compilation error [1]
>> >> >SWF compilation error [2]
>> >> >
>> >> >[1]
>> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
>> >> >che.org%2FJdNf=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> 7Cafcc22074376430e972508d
>> >> >5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> 7C636524147998979848&
>> >> >sdata=11pnBHmUDQhSfiCfYIsbBw9G1n8vPfwEoAP09onRP14%3D=0
>> >> >[2]
>> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
>> >> >che.org%2FQgUo=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> 7Cafcc22074376430e972508d
>> >> >5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> 7C636524147998979848&
>> >> >sdata=EcK0PgVPJWOa9YxQcvP6LbIbFZ32hNK6pjgsN695lxE%3D=0
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >2018-01-24 18:22 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>> >> >
>> >> >> The links do not work for me.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -Alex
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 1/24/18, 4:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Carlos,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >I know what causes the error :) I just wanted to know why the
>> >>message
>> >> >> >provided by compiler is different :)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Piotr
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >2018-01-24 13:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira
>>:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> there's a need for a final "h" here percentWidt
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> so it seems something is wrong in the generation right?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> 2018-01-24 13:08 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki
>> >> >>:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Hi,
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > I have found that during SWF only compilation and JS only
>> >>although
>> >> >>I'm
>> >> >> >> > getting the same errors they are reported a bit differently.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > In build: compiler.targets=JSRoyale I got [1]
>> >> >> >> > In build: compiler.targets=SWF I got [2]
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > There is no word "Error" in case of JSRoyale - Is this a bug
>>?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > [1]
>> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
>> >> >> >>ache.org%2FH7m7=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> >> 7C86539a854146402e21510
>> >> >> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> >> 7C6365239319247711
>> >> >> 
78=I0RlFQKtU8QJ48nFi3Zv6e9gmrVHfTqUiCD0rHxOfYs%3D=0
>> >> >> >> > [2]
>> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
>> >> >> >>ache.org%2FtvL9=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> >> >> 7C86539a854146402e21510
>> >> >> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> >> >> 7C6365239319247711
>> >> >> 
78=3SB0VZjSQ3cq15PMeNK9hDtVEf2IQ2W76uM0jVyyiXo%3D=0
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Thanks,
>> >> >> >> > --
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Piotr Zarzycki
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Patreon:
>> >> >> >>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
>> >> >> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
>> >> >> %7C86539a854146
>> >> >> >>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> >> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
>> >> >> >>31924771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%
>> >> >> 2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D
>> >> >> >>ed=0
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
>> >> >> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
>> >> >> %7C86539a854146
>> >> >> >>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> >> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
>> >> >> 

Re: Different results for compilation Error in JS and SWF compilation

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Not sure what do you mean ? That's how we use it I think so.

2018-01-24 21:28 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> Interesting.  Hadn't noticed that.  I guess you could compare the output
> logic in the compilers.  MXMLC.java should be used for SWF compiles and
> MXMLJSC.java for JS compiles.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 11:59 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>
> >Once Again:
> >
> >JSRoyale:
> >col: 12 This attribute is unexpected. It will be ignored.
> >:
> >: 
> >
> >SWF:
> >col: 12 Error: This attribute is unexpected. It will be ignored.
> >:
> >: 
> >
> >
> >
> >2018-01-24 20:47 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >
> >> Links are still broken.  Paste.a.o might be having problems.  Try just
> >>cut
> >> and paste of a section of the main differences.
> >>
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 1/24/18, 10:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> >Something happened with Apache paste. Posting once again.
> >> >
> >> >JSRoyale compilation error [1]
> >> >SWF compilation error [2]
> >> >
> >> >[1]
> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
> >> >che.org%2FJdNf=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> 7Cafcc22074376430e972508d
> >> >5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> 7C636524147998979848&
> >> >sdata=11pnBHmUDQhSfiCfYIsbBw9G1n8vPfwEoAP09onRP14%3D=0
> >> >[2]
> >> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
> >> >che.org%2FQgUo=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> 7Cafcc22074376430e972508d
> >> >5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> 7C636524147998979848&
> >> >sdata=EcK0PgVPJWOa9YxQcvP6LbIbFZ32hNK6pjgsN695lxE%3D=0
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >2018-01-24 18:22 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >> >
> >> >> The links do not work for me.
> >> >>
> >> >> -Alex
> >> >>
> >> >> On 1/24/18, 4:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Carlos,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I know what causes the error :) I just wanted to know why the
> >>message
> >> >> >provided by compiler is different :)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Piotr
> >> >> >
> >> >> >2018-01-24 13:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> there's a need for a final "h" here percentWidt
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> so it seems something is wrong in the generation right?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 2018-01-24 13:08 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki
> >> >>:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I have found that during SWF only compilation and JS only
> >>although
> >> >>I'm
> >> >> >> > getting the same errors they are reported a bit differently.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > In build: compiler.targets=JSRoyale I got [1]
> >> >> >> > In build: compiler.targets=SWF I got [2]
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > There is no word "Error" in case of JSRoyale - Is this a bug ?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > [1]
> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
> >> >> >>ache.org%2FH7m7=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> >> 7C86539a854146402e21510
> >> >> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> >> 7C6365239319247711
> >> >> >>78=I0RlFQKtU8QJ48nFi3Zv6e9gmrVHfTqUiCD0rHxOfYs%3D=0
> >> >> >> > [2]
> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
> >> >> >>ache.org%2FtvL9=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> >> 7C86539a854146402e21510
> >> >> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> >> 7C6365239319247711
> >> >> >>78=3SB0VZjSQ3cq15PMeNK9hDtVEf2IQ2W76uM0jVyyiXo%3D=0
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Thanks,
> >> >> >> > --
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Piotr Zarzycki
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Patreon:
> >> >> >>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
> >> >> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> >> >> %7C86539a854146
> >> >> >>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> >> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
> >> >> >>31924771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%
> >> >> 2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D
> >> >> >>ed=0
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
> >> >> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> >> >> %7C86539a854146
> >> >> >>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> >> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
> >> >> >>31924771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%
> >> >> 2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D
> >> >> >>ed=0>*
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >> Carlos Rovira
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
> >> >> >>2Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> >> >> 7C86539a854146402e215108
> >> >> >>d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >> >> 7C63652393192477117
> >> >> >>8=poE7DnL3nCR3TiIdTKcZq3XiXERRt8230P6BLzjq0pc%3D=0
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> 

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[Alex Harui]

Interesting.  There might be different rules for Apache Royale since our
repos are under the Apache organization, but if you can get it to work, I
think that would be helpful.

-Alex

On 1/24/18, 12:21 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

>Ahh Yes!
>
>You can do nice release on the GH. We are doing such based on TAG. I'm
>putting in the description links to the release [1]
>
>[1] 
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co
>m%2Fprominic%2FMoonshine-IDE%2Freleases=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>7C4f0876c2f05f4609fc0408d563680ef3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%
>7C0%7C636524220939419032=WThjkWpxGSPICEBhySb0JJtVJOIKT%2B1wevQ9mi9Kv
>Lg%3D=0
>
>
>
>2018-01-24 20:58 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>
>> The NPM install name is defined in package.json.
>>
>> The -bin-js package is JS only, no SWF support.  It's package name is
>> 'royale'.  Turns out there is already a 'royale' out there, so I've
>> already changed it to 'apache-royale' in the nightly builds and for the
>> next release.  Technically, we shouldn't NPM publish this package with
>>its
>> new name until we've officially released the source file with the new
>>name
>> in it, but also, technically, binary packages are not official releases
>>of
>> the ASF.  I think any individual could publish a nightly as
>>apache-royale,
>> but I'm not sure it is worth it.  Folks can just use npm install > the package> as I instructed upthread.  If someone wants to put that
>> package some place that isn't mirrored, they can do that as well.  We
>> could put it on the CI server, for example.
>>
>> The -bin-js-swf package contains SWF support and thus it contains a .js
>> file that downloads the Adobe SDKs.  It looks like that .js file needs
>> fixing so no matter where or how you get at that package, it will throw
>>an
>> error on installation.  Someone needs to take the time to fix that .js
>> file and then we can discuss whether to publish it or not.
>>
>> IMO, we should just tell folks who ask to install the 'royale' package
>>via
>> the mirrors or maybe put a copy up on another server.  Does GH have a
>> releases folder or something like that?  I hope to start the 0.9.1
>>release
>> in 10 to 14 days.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/24/18, 11:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
>>wrote:
>>
>> >I just wanted to say that we shouldn't loose opportunity to show that
>> >release. If npm is not working let's provide simple urls on the
>>website.
>> >
>> >2018-01-24 19:59 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki :
>> >
>> >> If npm is broken and it's require fix in the source I understand.
>>What's
>> >> with second option ? For this release we could provide on the
>>website at
>> >> least links.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Piotr
>> >>
>> >> 2018-01-24 19:33 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>> >>
>> >>> I'm not sure how to fix the npm issues without changing a source
>>file.
>> >>>  Any ideas?
>> >>>
>> >>> Get Outlook for
>> 
>Android%2Fna01.safelinks.protection.outlook=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
>%7C4f0876c2f05f4609fc0408d563680ef3%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1
>%7C0%7C0%7C636524220939419032=Q2ckBrKyA%2BPcM9J7bsJskhw14m2ynBTr
>ue3SuHD6QCI%3D=0.
>> com/?url=https%3A%2F%2
>> >>>Faka.ms%2Fghei36=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Cdec5bceb963f427bfce
>> >>>308d56362f69d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365241990598
>> 
>71558=Ck0YuGPpWIOI8OtZcmmk5bSdqlkdf209IgzgXGZhvL4%3D=0>
>> >>>
>> >>> 
>> >>> From: Piotr Zarzycki 
>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 10:17:12 AM
>> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
>> >>> Subject: Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm
>> >>>
>> >>> Alex,
>> >>>
>> >>> Can we republish once again everything ? If not can we upload
>>binaries
>> >>>to
>> >>> Apache mirrors[1] as we had this with Flex ?
>> >>>
>> >>> [1]
>> >>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%
>> >>> 2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Fdyn%2Fcloser.lua%2Fflex%2F4.16.1%
>> >>> 2Fbinaries%2Fapache-flex-sdk-4.16.1-bin.zip=02%7C01%
>> >>> 7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1faec7dcd0424ee4086108d56356b4c6%7Cfa
>> >>> 7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524146406190877&
>> >>> sdata=KS5MwWOTANwoaf9iihN2CBWFtTfOgUKfNBRMr5qb%2Blc%3D=0
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> Piotr
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 2018-01-24 19:11 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>> >>>
>> >>> > Bummer.  Maybe nobody actually tested the royale-swf package.  I
>>only
>> >>> > tested the royale package which we did not publish due to
>>collision
>> >>>with
>> >>> > another royale package out there.  In the next release we will
>>name
>> >>>the
>> >>> > packages apache-royale and apache-royale-swf.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Do you have time to try to fix it?  Running "ant release" builds
>> >>> packages
>> >>> > in the "out" folder.  

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Ahh Yes!

You can do nice release on the GH. We are doing such based on TAG. I'm
putting in the description links to the release [1]

[1] https://github.com/prominic/Moonshine-IDE/releases



2018-01-24 20:58 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> The NPM install name is defined in package.json.
>
> The -bin-js package is JS only, no SWF support.  It's package name is
> 'royale'.  Turns out there is already a 'royale' out there, so I've
> already changed it to 'apache-royale' in the nightly builds and for the
> next release.  Technically, we shouldn't NPM publish this package with its
> new name until we've officially released the source file with the new name
> in it, but also, technically, binary packages are not official releases of
> the ASF.  I think any individual could publish a nightly as apache-royale,
> but I'm not sure it is worth it.  Folks can just use npm install  the package> as I instructed upthread.  If someone wants to put that
> package some place that isn't mirrored, they can do that as well.  We
> could put it on the CI server, for example.
>
> The -bin-js-swf package contains SWF support and thus it contains a .js
> file that downloads the Adobe SDKs.  It looks like that .js file needs
> fixing so no matter where or how you get at that package, it will throw an
> error on installation.  Someone needs to take the time to fix that .js
> file and then we can discuss whether to publish it or not.
>
> IMO, we should just tell folks who ask to install the 'royale' package via
> the mirrors or maybe put a copy up on another server.  Does GH have a
> releases folder or something like that?  I hope to start the 0.9.1 release
> in 10 to 14 days.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 11:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>
> >I just wanted to say that we shouldn't loose opportunity to show that
> >release. If npm is not working let's provide simple urls on the website.
> >
> >2018-01-24 19:59 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki :
> >
> >> If npm is broken and it's require fix in the source I understand. What's
> >> with second option ? For this release we could provide on the website at
> >> least links.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Piotr
> >>
> >> 2018-01-24 19:33 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >>
> >>> I'm not sure how to fix the npm issues without changing a source file.
> >>>  Any ideas?
> >>>
> >>> Get Outlook for
> >>>Android com/?url=https%3A%2F%2
> >>>Faka.ms%2Fghei36=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cdec5bceb963f427bfce
> >>>308d56362f69d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365241990598
> >>>71558=Ck0YuGPpWIOI8OtZcmmk5bSdqlkdf209IgzgXGZhvL4%3D=0>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>> From: Piotr Zarzycki 
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 10:17:12 AM
> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm
> >>>
> >>> Alex,
> >>>
> >>> Can we republish once again everything ? If not can we upload binaries
> >>>to
> >>> Apache mirrors[1] as we had this with Flex ?
> >>>
> >>> [1]
> >>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%
> >>> 2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Fdyn%2Fcloser.lua%2Fflex%2F4.16.1%
> >>> 2Fbinaries%2Fapache-flex-sdk-4.16.1-bin.zip=02%7C01%
> >>> 7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1faec7dcd0424ee4086108d56356b4c6%7Cfa
> >>> 7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524146406190877&
> >>> sdata=KS5MwWOTANwoaf9iihN2CBWFtTfOgUKfNBRMr5qb%2Blc%3D=0
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Piotr
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2018-01-24 19:11 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
> >>>
> >>> > Bummer.  Maybe nobody actually tested the royale-swf package.  I only
> >>> > tested the royale package which we did not publish due to collision
> >>>with
> >>> > another royale package out there.  In the next release we will name
> >>>the
> >>> > packages apache-royale and apache-royale-swf.
> >>> >
> >>> > Do you have time to try to fix it?  Running "ant release" builds
> >>> packages
> >>> > in the "out" folder.  Or you can commit changes, and wait for the
> >>> nightly
> >>> > build.  In theory, instead of running "npm install royale-swf", you
> >>>can
> >>> > swap in the path to your out folder or the url to the nightly build
> >>> > package instead of "royale-swf".
> >>> >
> >>> > If you don't really need SWF support, you can try npm on the released
> >>> > bin-js.tar.gz file.  Go get the link to the package on the mirrors by
> >>> > hitting this link:
> >>> >
> >>> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%
> >>> 2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Fdyn%2Fcloser.lua%2Froyale%2F0.9.0%
> >>> 2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1faec7dcd0424ee4
> >>> 086108d56356b4c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> >>> 7C636524146406190877=%2FFYClpVHC44aEj%2FdYXDGvfqwQq%2F
> >>> 2nxga4gg309Oh48I%3D=0
> >>> > binaries/apache-royale-0.
> >>> > 9.0-bin-js.tar.gz
> >>> >
> >>> > Then try 'npm install -g '.
> 

Updating 2015 FlexJS presentation

[Andrew Wetmore]

Hi:

Om presented this slide deck at ApacheCon in 2015 [1]. The FlexJS help docs
refer to it, and I wondered if it would be worth updating for current use
with Royale.

I would be happy to do the grunt work of updating the slides if someone can
provide the PowerPoint. Do we have a place to host such things?

Oh, was there a presentation script with this? If it is written out, I
would be glad to record it and turn it and the PowerPoint into a little
video we could post (and host) on YouTube. I do a lot of voice work for
various companies and record audio and assemble videos for them in my own
studio.

a


[1]
https://events.static.linuxfound.org/sites/events/files/slides/FlexJS_ApacheCon_2015.pdf

-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Directory and File naming conventions

[Alex Harui]

On 1/24/18, 9:59 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:

>Hi Andrew,
>
>Thanks for doing the research.  I didn't even think about "-".  That seems
>like a good idea to me.

Speaking of '-', I saw in your recent commit that the Front Matter title
had '-' in it.  That title becomes the  so I don't
think that should have '-' in it.  I think it can use plain spaces and
doesn't need escaping.  I don't think it is used to resolve links.

Thoughts?
-Alex  

>

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[Alex Harui]

The NPM install name is defined in package.json.

The -bin-js package is JS only, no SWF support.  It's package name is
'royale'.  Turns out there is already a 'royale' out there, so I've
already changed it to 'apache-royale' in the nightly builds and for the
next release.  Technically, we shouldn't NPM publish this package with its
new name until we've officially released the source file with the new name
in it, but also, technically, binary packages are not official releases of
the ASF.  I think any individual could publish a nightly as apache-royale,
but I'm not sure it is worth it.  Folks can just use npm install  as I instructed upthread.  If someone wants to put that
package some place that isn't mirrored, they can do that as well.  We
could put it on the CI server, for example.

The -bin-js-swf package contains SWF support and thus it contains a .js
file that downloads the Adobe SDKs.  It looks like that .js file needs
fixing so no matter where or how you get at that package, it will throw an
error on installation.  Someone needs to take the time to fix that .js
file and then we can discuss whether to publish it or not.

IMO, we should just tell folks who ask to install the 'royale' package via
the mirrors or maybe put a copy up on another server.  Does GH have a
releases folder or something like that?  I hope to start the 0.9.1 release
in 10 to 14 days.

Thoughts?
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 11:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

>I just wanted to say that we shouldn't loose opportunity to show that
>release. If npm is not working let's provide simple urls on the website.
>
>2018-01-24 19:59 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki :
>
>> If npm is broken and it's require fix in the source I understand. What's
>> with second option ? For this release we could provide on the website at
>> least links.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Piotr
>>
>> 2018-01-24 19:33 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>>
>>> I'm not sure how to fix the npm issues without changing a source file.
>>>  Any ideas?
>>>
>>> Get Outlook for
>>>Android>>Faka.ms%2Fghei36=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cdec5bceb963f427bfce
>>>308d56362f69d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365241990598
>>>71558=Ck0YuGPpWIOI8OtZcmmk5bSdqlkdf209IgzgXGZhvL4%3D=0>
>>>
>>> 
>>> From: Piotr Zarzycki 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2018 10:17:12 AM
>>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm
>>>
>>> Alex,
>>>
>>> Can we republish once again everything ? If not can we upload binaries
>>>to
>>> Apache mirrors[1] as we had this with Flex ?
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%
>>> 2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Fdyn%2Fcloser.lua%2Fflex%2F4.16.1%
>>> 2Fbinaries%2Fapache-flex-sdk-4.16.1-bin.zip=02%7C01%
>>> 7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1faec7dcd0424ee4086108d56356b4c6%7Cfa
>>> 7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524146406190877&
>>> sdata=KS5MwWOTANwoaf9iihN2CBWFtTfOgUKfNBRMr5qb%2Blc%3D=0
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Piotr
>>>
>>>
>>> 2018-01-24 19:11 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>>>
>>> > Bummer.  Maybe nobody actually tested the royale-swf package.  I only
>>> > tested the royale package which we did not publish due to collision
>>>with
>>> > another royale package out there.  In the next release we will name
>>>the
>>> > packages apache-royale and apache-royale-swf.
>>> >
>>> > Do you have time to try to fix it?  Running "ant release" builds
>>> packages
>>> > in the "out" folder.  Or you can commit changes, and wait for the
>>> nightly
>>> > build.  In theory, instead of running "npm install royale-swf", you
>>>can
>>> > swap in the path to your out folder or the url to the nightly build
>>> > package instead of "royale-swf".
>>> >
>>> > If you don't really need SWF support, you can try npm on the released
>>> > bin-js.tar.gz file.  Go get the link to the package on the mirrors by
>>> > hitting this link:
>>> >
>>> > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%
>>> 2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Fdyn%2Fcloser.lua%2Froyale%2F0.9.0%
>>> 2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C1faec7dcd0424ee4
>>> 086108d56356b4c6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>>> 7C636524146406190877=%2FFYClpVHC44aEj%2FdYXDGvfqwQq%2F
>>> 2nxga4gg309Oh48I%3D=0
>>> > binaries/apache-royale-0.
>>> > 9.0-bin-js.tar.gz
>>> >
>>> > Then try 'npm install -g '.
>>> >
>>> > It seemed to work for me.
>>> >
>>> > HTH,
>>> > -Alex
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 1/24/18, 9:21 AM, "Josh Tynjala"  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > >I get the following console output when I run `npm install -g
>>> royale-swf`
>>> > >
>>> > >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>>> > https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
>>> > >che.org%2FxA7e=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>>> > 7C10eefaebf4d64e560dc708d
>>> > >5634ee373%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>>> > 

Re: Different results for compilation Error in JS and SWF compilation

[Alex Harui]

Links are still broken.  Paste.a.o might be having problems.  Try just cut
and paste of a section of the main differences.

-Alex

On 1/24/18, 10:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

>Something happened with Apache paste. Posting once again.
>
>JSRoyale compilation error [1]
>SWF compilation error [2]
>
>[1] 
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
>che.org%2FJdNf=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cafcc22074376430e972508d
>5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524147998979848&
>sdata=11pnBHmUDQhSfiCfYIsbBw9G1n8vPfwEoAP09onRP14%3D=0
>[2] 
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
>che.org%2FQgUo=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cafcc22074376430e972508d
>5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524147998979848&
>sdata=EcK0PgVPJWOa9YxQcvP6LbIbFZ32hNK6pjgsN695lxE%3D=0
>
>
>
>2018-01-24 18:22 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>
>> The links do not work for me.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/24/18, 4:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>>
>> >Carlos,
>> >
>> >I know what causes the error :) I just wanted to know why the message
>> >provided by compiler is different :)
>> >
>> >Piotr
>> >
>> >2018-01-24 13:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
>> >
>> >> there's a need for a final "h" here percentWidt
>> >>
>> >> so it seems something is wrong in the generation right?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 2018-01-24 13:08 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki
>>:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > I have found that during SWF only compilation and JS only although
>>I'm
>> >> > getting the same errors they are reported a bit differently.
>> >> >
>> >> > In build: compiler.targets=JSRoyale I got [1]
>> >> > In build: compiler.targets=SWF I got [2]
>> >> >
>> >> > There is no word "Error" in case of JSRoyale - Is this a bug ?
>> >> >
>> >> > [1]
>> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
>> >>ache.org%2FH7m7=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7C86539a854146402e21510
>> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C6365239319247711
>> >>78=I0RlFQKtU8QJ48nFi3Zv6e9gmrVHfTqUiCD0rHxOfYs%3D=0
>> >> > [2]
>> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
>> >>ache.org%2FtvL9=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7C86539a854146402e21510
>> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C6365239319247711
>> >>78=3SB0VZjSQ3cq15PMeNK9hDtVEf2IQ2W76uM0jVyyiXo%3D=0
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks,
>> >> > --
>> >> >
>> >> > Piotr Zarzycki
>> >> >
>> >> > Patreon:
>> >>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
>> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
>> %7C86539a854146
>> >>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
>> >>31924771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%
>> 2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D
>> >>ed=0
>> >> >
>> >>> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
>> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
>> %7C86539a854146
>> >>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
>> >>31924771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%
>> 2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D
>> >>ed=0>*
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Carlos Rovira
>> >>
>> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>> >>2Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7C86539a854146402e215108
>> >>d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C63652393192477117
>> >>8=poE7DnL3nCR3TiIdTKcZq3XiXERRt8230P6BLzjq0pc%3D=0
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >
>> >Piotr Zarzycki
>> >
>> >Patreon:
>> >*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
>> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7C86539a85414640
>> >2e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239319
>> >24771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D&
>> reserved=0
>> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
>> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7C86539a85414640
>> >2e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239319
>> >24771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D&
>> reserved=0
>> >>*
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>
>Piotr Zarzycki
>
>Patreon: 
>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
>eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cafcc2207437643
>0e972508d5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365241479
>98979848=0BDb%2FFUwg%2FIBZE24ilHXu845iMa%2Fmu9iDF9P7NK3sYc%3D
>ed=0
>eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cafcc2207437643
>0e972508d5635711da%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365241479
>98979848=0BDb%2FFUwg%2FIBZE24ilHXu845iMa%2Fmu9iDF9P7NK3sYc%3D

Re: Different results for compilation Error in JS and SWF compilation

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Something happened with Apache paste. Posting once again.

JSRoyale compilation error [1]
SWF compilation error [2]

[1] https://paste.apache.org/JdNf
[2] https://paste.apache.org/QgUo



2018-01-24 18:22 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> The links do not work for me.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 4:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>
> >Carlos,
> >
> >I know what causes the error :) I just wanted to know why the message
> >provided by compiler is different :)
> >
> >Piotr
> >
> >2018-01-24 13:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
> >
> >> there's a need for a final "h" here percentWidt
> >>
> >> so it seems something is wrong in the generation right?
> >>
> >>
> >> 2018-01-24 13:08 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki :
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I have found that during SWF only compilation and JS only although I'm
> >> > getting the same errors they are reported a bit differently.
> >> >
> >> > In build: compiler.targets=JSRoyale I got [1]
> >> > In build: compiler.targets=SWF I got [2]
> >> >
> >> > There is no word "Error" in case of JSRoyale - Is this a bug ?
> >> >
> >> > [1]
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
> >>ache.org%2FH7m7=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C86539a854146402e21510
> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C6365239319247711
> >>78=I0RlFQKtU8QJ48nFi3Zv6e9gmrVHfTqUiCD0rHxOfYs%3D=0
> >> > [2]
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
> >>ache.org%2FtvL9=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C86539a854146402e21510
> >>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C6365239319247711
> >>78=3SB0VZjSQ3cq15PMeNK9hDtVEf2IQ2W76uM0jVyyiXo%3D=0
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > --
> >> >
> >> > Piotr Zarzycki
> >> >
> >> > Patreon:
> >>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> %7C86539a854146
> >>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
> >>31924771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%
> 2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D
> >>ed=0
> >> >
> >> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
> >>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> %7C86539a854146
> >>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
> >>31924771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%
> 2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D
> >>ed=0>*
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Carlos Rovira
> >>
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
> >>2Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C86539a854146402e215108
> >>d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C63652393192477117
> >>8=poE7DnL3nCR3TiIdTKcZq3XiXERRt8230P6BLzjq0pc%3D=0
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >
> >Piotr Zarzycki
> >
> >Patreon:
> >*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C86539a85414640
> >2e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239319
> >24771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D&
> reserved=0
> > https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
> >eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C86539a85414640
> >2e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239319
> >24771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D&
> reserved=0
> >>*
>
>


-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

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

Re: Directory and File naming conventions

[Alex Harui]

On 1/24/18, 10:07 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:

>My argument for sentence case over title case is that, in general, fewer
>capital letters makes for easier scanning and comprehension, especially
>for
>folks for whom English is not the first or a comfortable language.

OK, If my fifth grade teacher (that I ran into the other day) give me any
grief about it, I will point him to you ;-)
>
>I do not have time today to scrub existing files and the table of
>contents,
>and I also want to give other people a chance to weigh in if they want to.
>However, within a day or two let's proclaim a standard and I will help
>make
>what we have done so far comply with it.

OK, I will continue to mess around with the TOC and Features page to
verify the third-level works.  FWIW, I think we could put the TOC in a
.JSON file and make adding a new page as simple as editing the TOC's JSON
file instead of having to make changes in about 8 places in the
docpage.html.  But that would take about a day so I'm not sure if it is
worth it.
>
>You terrify me with your comments about Git. I don't even know what "git
>mv" would be, although I presume it is down in command line purgatory
>somewhere.

You will probably have to get to know Git better.  'Git mv" is how to
rename files under Git's control.  Just using the file system seems to
confuse it some times.  Not sure if there is a way to rename using the GH
UI.

Thanks,
-Alex
>
>On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:59 PM, Alex Harui 
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrew,
>>
>> Thanks for doing the research.  I didn't even think about "-".  That
>>seems
>> like a good idea to me.
>>
>> I think of page titles and TOC entries as chapter titles in books so my
>> first instinct is to use title case, but if you really want to use
>> sentence case, that's fine with me.  I feel the same way about section
>> headers in the content as well, but either way is fine.
>>
>> If you want to do a massive scrub of the develop branch, go ahead and do
>> it and let us know when you are done.  I will go play around with the
>> ASDoc app today so I don't get in your way.  Reminder:  use "git mv" or
>> its equivalent when renaming files.  I've seen Git seem to lose track
>>if I
>> just rename via the file system.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/24/18, 9:44 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
>>
>> > From a quick and non-comprehensive review:
>> >
>> >
>> >   - Practis [1] recommends using all lower case, with no spaces, for
>>file
>> >   names, with _ or - to join words and no other punctuation.
>> >   - Huridocs [2] concurs and suggests some tools for doing bulk file
>> >   renaming.
>> >   - Winthrop University[4] recommends - instead of _ for joining
>>words in
>> >   file names because it improves SEO. Website argues against both _
>>and
>> >%20
>> >   because they can be misread by search engines and humans.
>> >   - The Site Wizard [5] pushes hard for all lower case, no special
>> >   characters, no running words together, and - instead of _ between
>> >words.
>> >
>> >Nobody out there seems to care about imperative ("Get Started") versus
>> >gerund ("Getting Started"). I will note that, over the course of a
>>large
>> >ToC such as ours, going with imperative will save us maybe 100s of
>> >characters and create a cleaner look.
>> >
>> >Nobody seems to have strong opinions about title case (How to Do This)
>> >versus sentence case (How to do this) for the text title within a
>> >document.
>> >
>> >a
>> >
>> >
>> >[1]
>> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fpractisin
>> >c.com%2Fblog%2Fmedical-website-design%2Ftech-tip-
>> month-naming-files-proper
>> >ly-better-accessibility-usability%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
>> %7Cd
>> >3caeddc00764bba1f3008d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0
>> >%7C636524126676229651=uuIpSctA8dw3YI0PTKpI6hjOSk5%
>> 2FMHYzZ4HNqxR66kg%
>> >3D=0
>> >[2]
>> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hurid
>> >ocs.org%2F2016%2F07%2Ffile-naming-conventions-why-you-
>> want-them-and-how-to
>> >-create-them%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Cd3caeddc00764bba1f3008
>> >d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C636524126676229651
>> >=RwSEoJ4XrC3BxcvHudAEYJKewEkUSZLQtkoizhLbWfE%3D=0
>> >[3]
>> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fusability
>> >geek.com%2F12-effective-guidelines-for-breadcrumb-
>> usability-and-seo%2F
>> >a=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd3caeddc00764bba1f3008d56352
>> 1c87%7Cfa7b1b
>> >5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524126676229651&
>> sdata=MAZ0mKHOoqFd
>> >sdDp5xzVfl4gF1z5mUBoHo11dtmIDHI%3D=0
>> >[4]
>> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.winth
>> >rop.edu%2Fweb%2Ffilenaming%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
>> %7Cd3caeddc
>> >00764bba1f3008d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365
>> 

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Alex,

Can we republish once again everything ? If not can we upload binaries to
Apache mirrors[1] as we had this with Flex ?

[1]
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/flex/4.16.1/binaries/apache-flex-sdk-4.16.1-bin.zip

Thanks,
Piotr


2018-01-24 19:11 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> Bummer.  Maybe nobody actually tested the royale-swf package.  I only
> tested the royale package which we did not publish due to collision with
> another royale package out there.  In the next release we will name the
> packages apache-royale and apache-royale-swf.
>
> Do you have time to try to fix it?  Running "ant release" builds packages
> in the "out" folder.  Or you can commit changes, and wait for the nightly
> build.  In theory, instead of running "npm install royale-swf", you can
> swap in the path to your out folder or the url to the nightly build
> package instead of "royale-swf".
>
> If you don't really need SWF support, you can try npm on the released
> bin-js.tar.gz file.  Go get the link to the package on the mirrors by
> hitting this link:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> binaries/apache-royale-0.
> 9.0-bin-js.tar.gz
>
> Then try 'npm install -g '.
>
> It seemed to work for me.
>
> HTH,
> -Alex
>
>
> On 1/24/18, 9:21 AM, "Josh Tynjala"  wrote:
>
> >I get the following console output when I run `npm install -g royale-swf`
> >
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
> >che.org%2FxA7e=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7C10eefaebf4d64e560dc708d
> >5634ee373%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636524112827939628&
> >sdata=BsIWbDYgwtLmEWFmTte7MT8Keb0orwvHRhx47rCVgjw%3D=0
> >
> >It appears that royale-asjs is missing from the path when running the
> >`npm/dependencies/download_dependencies.js` script.
> >
> >- Josh
>
>


-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

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

Re: Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[Alex Harui]

Bummer.  Maybe nobody actually tested the royale-swf package.  I only
tested the royale package which we did not publish due to collision with
another royale package out there.  In the next release we will name the
packages apache-royale and apache-royale-swf.

Do you have time to try to fix it?  Running "ant release" builds packages
in the "out" folder.  Or you can commit changes, and wait for the nightly
build.  In theory, instead of running "npm install royale-swf", you can
swap in the path to your out folder or the url to the nightly build
package instead of "royale-swf".

If you don't really need SWF support, you can try npm on the released
bin-js.tar.gz file.  Go get the link to the package on the mirrors by
hitting this link:

http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/binaries/apache-royale-0.
9.0-bin-js.tar.gz

Then try 'npm install -g '.

It seemed to work for me.

HTH,
-Alex


On 1/24/18, 9:21 AM, "Josh Tynjala"  wrote:

>I get the following console output when I run `npm install -g royale-swf`
>
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apa
>che.org%2FxA7e=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C10eefaebf4d64e560dc708d
>5634ee373%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524112827939628&
>sdata=BsIWbDYgwtLmEWFmTte7MT8Keb0orwvHRhx47rCVgjw%3D=0
>
>It appears that royale-asjs is missing from the path when running the
>`npm/dependencies/download_dependencies.js` script.
>
>- Josh

Re: Directory and File naming conventions

[Andrew Wetmore]

My argument for sentence case over title case is that, in general, fewer
capital letters makes for easier scanning and comprehension, especially for
folks for whom English is not the first or a comfortable language.

I do not have time today to scrub existing files and the table of contents,
and I also want to give other people a chance to weigh in if they want to.
However, within a day or two let's proclaim a standard and I will help make
what we have done so far comply with it.

You terrify me with your comments about Git. I don't even know what "git
mv" would be, although I presume it is down in command line purgatory
somewhere.

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:59 PM, Alex Harui 
wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thanks for doing the research.  I didn't even think about "-".  That seems
> like a good idea to me.
>
> I think of page titles and TOC entries as chapter titles in books so my
> first instinct is to use title case, but if you really want to use
> sentence case, that's fine with me.  I feel the same way about section
> headers in the content as well, but either way is fine.
>
> If you want to do a massive scrub of the develop branch, go ahead and do
> it and let us know when you are done.  I will go play around with the
> ASDoc app today so I don't get in your way.  Reminder:  use "git mv" or
> its equivalent when renaming files.  I've seen Git seem to lose track if I
> just rename via the file system.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 9:44 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
>
> > From a quick and non-comprehensive review:
> >
> >
> >   - Practis [1] recommends using all lower case, with no spaces, for file
> >   names, with _ or - to join words and no other punctuation.
> >   - Huridocs [2] concurs and suggests some tools for doing bulk file
> >   renaming.
> >   - Winthrop University[4] recommends - instead of _ for joining words in
> >   file names because it improves SEO. Website argues against both _ and
> >%20
> >   because they can be misread by search engines and humans.
> >   - The Site Wizard [5] pushes hard for all lower case, no special
> >   characters, no running words together, and - instead of _ between
> >words.
> >
> >Nobody out there seems to care about imperative ("Get Started") versus
> >gerund ("Getting Started"). I will note that, over the course of a large
> >ToC such as ours, going with imperative will save us maybe 100s of
> >characters and create a cleaner look.
> >
> >Nobody seems to have strong opinions about title case (How to Do This)
> >versus sentence case (How to do this) for the text title within a
> >document.
> >
> >a
> >
> >
> >[1]
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fpractisin
> >c.com%2Fblog%2Fmedical-website-design%2Ftech-tip-
> month-naming-files-proper
> >ly-better-accessibility-usability%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> %7Cd
> >3caeddc00764bba1f3008d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0
> >%7C636524126676229651=uuIpSctA8dw3YI0PTKpI6hjOSk5%
> 2FMHYzZ4HNqxR66kg%
> >3D=0
> >[2]
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hurid
> >ocs.org%2F2016%2F07%2Ffile-naming-conventions-why-you-
> want-them-and-how-to
> >-create-them%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cd3caeddc00764bba1f3008
> >d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636524126676229651
> >=RwSEoJ4XrC3BxcvHudAEYJKewEkUSZLQtkoizhLbWfE%3D=0
> >[3]
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fusability
> >geek.com%2F12-effective-guidelines-for-breadcrumb-
> usability-and-seo%2F
> >a=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd3caeddc00764bba1f3008d56352
> 1c87%7Cfa7b1b
> >5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524126676229651&
> sdata=MAZ0mKHOoqFd
> >sdDp5xzVfl4gF1z5mUBoHo11dtmIDHI%3D=0
> >[4]
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.winth
> >rop.edu%2Fweb%2Ffilenaming%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> %7Cd3caeddc
> >00764bba1f3008d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365
> >24126676229651=tqAFNsAr6m6jDFih9sQr1vuSx1DkBN
> aUhZ%2FEFrNSDJM%3D
> >rved=0
> >[5]
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesi
> >tewizard.com%2Fwebdesign%2Fcreate-good-filenames.shtml&
> data=02%7C01%7Cahar
> >ui%40adobe.com%7Cd3caeddc00764bba1f3008d56352
> 1c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2
> >c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524126676229651=
> 5G2s8qQ8bipZOfdGNvk3UCgOnY7a
> >gfo07acJJz4oWGU%3D=0
> >
> >On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 12:19 PM, Alex Harui 
> >wrote:
> >
> >> HI Andrew,
> >>
> >> Good question.  I'm pretty sure I don't care as long as it meets
> >>usability
> >> goals.  Maybe you already know what usability goals a "help docs" site
> >> should have, but maybe we should first agree on usability goals and work
> >> backwards to how the directory and file names affect that if at all.  I
> >> didn't know how Jekyll worked when first putting together the skeleton
> >>so
> >> I 

Re: [DRAFT] [ANNOUNCE] Apache Royale 0.9.0 Released

[Andrew Wetmore]

Tweakage: I would change this passage

This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base into an
SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
handle production needs.

to this

This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
strategies, and and to recruit new contributors. We hope to grow the code
base into an
SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity when developing
applications that can run on many platforms. Beta releases may not
handle production needs.

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 1:49 PM, Alex Harui 
wrote:

> Please comment on the draft below. Quite frankly, I'm not clear how much
> noise we want to make about 0.9.0.  Looks like NPM is not working at all.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
> ---
>
> The Apache Royale community is pleased to announce the release of Apache
> Royale 0.9.0.
>
> Apache Royale is a new project that took over the work on what was being
> called FlexJS, a next-generation of the Apache Flex SDK that enables
> developers to use MXML and ActionScript to generated HTML/JS/CSS so
> applications can run natively in browsers.  The cross-compiled code can
> also be used in Apache Cordova (Adobe PhoneGap) mobile applications.
>
> (Apache Flex is a highly productive, open source application framework for
> building and maintaining expressive applications that deploy on Adobe
> Flash and Adobe AIR to provide a consistent experience on all major
> browsers, desktops and devices.)
>
>
> This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
> release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
> strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base into an
> SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
> applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
> handle production needs.  Expect lots of bugs and
> missing features.  Please file bugs at:
>
> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/issues
>
>
> (If you happen to know it is a compiler issue, please use:
> https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues)
>
> For questions about how to use Royale, send email to
> us...@royale.apache.org.  For questions and feedback on the development of
> the source code in the release, send email to dev@royale.apache.org.
>
> Apache Royale is available in source and binary
> form from the Apache mirrors:
>
> Source:
> http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> apache-royale-0.9.0-src.t
> ar.gz
>
> http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> apache-royale-0.9.0-src.z
> ip
>
> Binary:
> http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> binaries/apache-royale-0.
> 9.0-bin-js.tar.gz
> http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> binaries/apache-royale-0.
> 9.0-bin-js.zip
>
> Binary with SWF support:
> http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> binaries/apache-royale-0.
> 9.0-bin-js-swf.tar.gz
> http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/
> binaries/apache-royale-0.
> 9.0-bin-js-swf.zip
>
>
>
>
> When downloading from a mirror site, please remember to verify the
> downloads using signatures or MD5 hashes.
>
> Installation via NPM is not working in this release but should be working
> in the next release.
>
> See the README for more information. Visit http://royale.apache.org/ for
> links to other resources.
>
> Please try Royale and become involved in shaping the future of application
> development.
>
> The Apache Royale Community
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Directory and File naming conventions

[Alex Harui]

Hi Andrew,

Thanks for doing the research.  I didn't even think about "-".  That seems
like a good idea to me.

I think of page titles and TOC entries as chapter titles in books so my
first instinct is to use title case, but if you really want to use
sentence case, that's fine with me.  I feel the same way about section
headers in the content as well, but either way is fine.

If you want to do a massive scrub of the develop branch, go ahead and do
it and let us know when you are done.  I will go play around with the
ASDoc app today so I don't get in your way.  Reminder:  use "git mv" or
its equivalent when renaming files.  I've seen Git seem to lose track if I
just rename via the file system.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 9:44 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:

> From a quick and non-comprehensive review:
>
>
>   - Practis [1] recommends using all lower case, with no spaces, for file
>   names, with _ or - to join words and no other punctuation.
>   - Huridocs [2] concurs and suggests some tools for doing bulk file
>   renaming.
>   - Winthrop University[4] recommends - instead of _ for joining words in
>   file names because it improves SEO. Website argues against both _ and
>%20
>   because they can be misread by search engines and humans.
>   - The Site Wizard [5] pushes hard for all lower case, no special
>   characters, no running words together, and - instead of _ between
>words.
>
>Nobody out there seems to care about imperative ("Get Started") versus
>gerund ("Getting Started"). I will note that, over the course of a large
>ToC such as ours, going with imperative will save us maybe 100s of
>characters and create a cleaner look.
>
>Nobody seems to have strong opinions about title case (How to Do This)
>versus sentence case (How to do this) for the text title within a
>document.
>
>a
>
>
>[1]
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpractisin
>c.com%2Fblog%2Fmedical-website-design%2Ftech-tip-month-naming-files-proper
>ly-better-accessibility-usability%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd
>3caeddc00764bba1f3008d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0
>%7C636524126676229651=uuIpSctA8dw3YI0PTKpI6hjOSk5%2FMHYzZ4HNqxR66kg%
>3D=0
>[2]
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hurid
>ocs.org%2F2016%2F07%2Ffile-naming-conventions-why-you-want-them-and-how-to
>-create-them%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd3caeddc00764bba1f3008
>d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524126676229651
>=RwSEoJ4XrC3BxcvHudAEYJKewEkUSZLQtkoizhLbWfE%3D=0
>[3]
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fusability
>geek.com%2F12-effective-guidelines-for-breadcrumb-usability-and-seo%2F
>a=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd3caeddc00764bba1f3008d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b
>5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524126676229651=MAZ0mKHOoqFd
>sdDp5xzVfl4gF1z5mUBoHo11dtmIDHI%3D=0
>[4] 
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.winth
>rop.edu%2Fweb%2Ffilenaming%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd3caeddc
>00764bba1f3008d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365
>24126676229651=tqAFNsAr6m6jDFih9sQr1vuSx1DkBNaUhZ%2FEFrNSDJM%3D
>rved=0
>[5] 
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesi
>tewizard.com%2Fwebdesign%2Fcreate-good-filenames.shtml=02%7C01%7Cahar
>ui%40adobe.com%7Cd3caeddc00764bba1f3008d563521c87%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2
>c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524126676229651=5G2s8qQ8bipZOfdGNvk3UCgOnY7a
>gfo07acJJz4oWGU%3D=0
>
>On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 12:19 PM, Alex Harui 
>wrote:
>
>> HI Andrew,
>>
>> Good question.  I'm pretty sure I don't care as long as it meets
>>usability
>> goals.  Maybe you already know what usability goals a "help docs" site
>> should have, but maybe we should first agree on usability goals and work
>> backwards to how the directory and file names affect that if at all.  I
>> didn't know how Jekyll worked when first putting together the skeleton
>>so
>> I picked spaces (%20) just as a guess.
>>
>> I think the usability goals are something like:
>> A) what shows up as the page/tab title?
>> B) What do the links look like?
>> C) Do search engines care?
>> D) What do the links look like in search engine results?
>> E) What do the links look like when hovering over them? Or in Bookmarks?
>> F) Do people have expectations around uppercase, lowercase, sentence
>>case,
>> etc?
>> G) What will screen readers read to vision-impaired people?
>>
>> Other user-facing issues?
>>
>> I believe I've learned that in Jekyll the title is in the "front matter"
>> and is independent of the file name.  If you want to make some changes
>>and
>> test that out, feel free.
>>
>> I don't know if folks would rather see "_" instead of %20 in links.  Or
>> even Camel Case: GettingStarted.html.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/24/18, 7:34 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
>>
>> >This is for the help documentation, but 

[DRAFT] [ANNOUNCE] Apache Royale 0.9.0 Released

[Alex Harui]

Please comment on the draft below. Quite frankly, I'm not clear how much
noise we want to make about 0.9.0.  Looks like NPM is not working at all.

Thoughts?
-Alex

---

The Apache Royale community is pleased to announce the release of Apache
Royale 0.9.0.

Apache Royale is a new project that took over the work on what was being
called FlexJS, a next-generation of the Apache Flex SDK that enables
developers to use MXML and ActionScript to generated HTML/JS/CSS so
applications can run natively in browsers.  The cross-compiled code can
also be used in Apache Cordova (Adobe PhoneGap) mobile applications.

(Apache Flex is a highly productive, open source application framework for
building and maintaining expressive applications that deploy on Adobe
Flash and Adobe AIR to provide a consistent experience on all major
browsers, desktops and devices.)


This release should be considered ‘beta' quality. The purpose of this
release is to gather feedback about the features and implementation
strategies, and recruit new contributors as we grow the code base into an
SDK and tool chain that delivers the highest productivity developing
applications that can run in the most places. These releases may not
handle production needs.  Expect lots of bugs and
missing features.  Please file bugs at:

https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/issues


(If you happen to know it is a compiler issue, please use:
https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues)

For questions about how to use Royale, send email to
us...@royale.apache.org.  For questions and feedback on the development of
the source code in the release, send email to dev@royale.apache.org.

Apache Royale is available in source and binary
form from the Apache mirrors:

Source:
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/apache-royale-0.9.0-src.t
ar.gz

http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/apache-royale-0.9.0-src.z
ip

Binary:
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/binaries/apache-royale-0.
9.0-bin-js.tar.gz
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/binaries/apache-royale-0.
9.0-bin-js.zip

Binary with SWF support:
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/binaries/apache-royale-0.
9.0-bin-js-swf.tar.gz
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.0/binaries/apache-royale-0.
9.0-bin-js-swf.zip




When downloading from a mirror site, please remember to verify the
downloads using signatures or MD5 hashes.

Installation via NPM is not working in this release but should be working
in the next release.

See the README for more information. Visit http://royale.apache.org/ for
links to other resources.

Please try Royale and become involved in shaping the future of application
development.

The Apache Royale Community

Re: Directory and File naming conventions

[Andrew Wetmore]

 From a quick and non-comprehensive review:


   - Practis [1] recommends using all lower case, with no spaces, for file
   names, with _ or - to join words and no other punctuation.
   - Huridocs [2] concurs and suggests some tools for doing bulk file
   renaming.
   - Winthrop University[4] recommends - instead of _ for joining words in
   file names because it improves SEO. Website argues against both _ and %20
   because they can be misread by search engines and humans.
   - The Site Wizard [5] pushes hard for all lower case, no special
   characters, no running words together, and - instead of _ between words.

Nobody out there seems to care about imperative ("Get Started") versus
gerund ("Getting Started"). I will note that, over the course of a large
ToC such as ours, going with imperative will save us maybe 100s of
characters and create a cleaner look.

Nobody seems to have strong opinions about title case (How to Do This)
versus sentence case (How to do this) for the text title within a document.

a


[1]
https://practisinc.com/blog/medical-website-design/tech-tip-month-naming-files-properly-better-accessibility-usability/
[2]
https://www.huridocs.org/2016/07/file-naming-conventions-why-you-want-them-and-how-to-create-them/
[3]
https://usabilitygeek.com/12-effective-guidelines-for-breadcrumb-usability-and-seo/
[4] https://www.winthrop.edu/web/filenaming/
[5] https://www.thesitewizard.com/webdesign/create-good-filenames.shtml

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 12:19 PM, Alex Harui 
wrote:

> HI Andrew,
>
> Good question.  I'm pretty sure I don't care as long as it meets usability
> goals.  Maybe you already know what usability goals a "help docs" site
> should have, but maybe we should first agree on usability goals and work
> backwards to how the directory and file names affect that if at all.  I
> didn't know how Jekyll worked when first putting together the skeleton so
> I picked spaces (%20) just as a guess.
>
> I think the usability goals are something like:
> A) what shows up as the page/tab title?
> B) What do the links look like?
> C) Do search engines care?
> D) What do the links look like in search engine results?
> E) What do the links look like when hovering over them? Or in Bookmarks?
> F) Do people have expectations around uppercase, lowercase, sentence case,
> etc?
> G) What will screen readers read to vision-impaired people?
>
> Other user-facing issues?
>
> I believe I've learned that in Jekyll the title is in the "front matter"
> and is independent of the file name.  If you want to make some changes and
> test that out, feel free.
>
> I don't know if folks would rather see "_" instead of %20 in links.  Or
> even Camel Case: GettingStarted.html.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 7:34 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:
>
> >This is for the help documentation, but maybe there are already some
> >conventions in place for the code base that we should follow.
> >
> >
> >   1. Are we using all lower case, sentence case (Getting started), or
> >   initial caps (Getting Started) for directory and file names?
> >   2. Are we using sentence case or initial caps for the title at the top
> >   of each help doc's text?
> >   3. Are we using underscores (Getting_Started) or HTML code
> >(Getting%20Started)?
> >   I see the former in the code for the web page and the latter for the
> >help
> >   docs.
> >   4. Are we using declarative verbs (Get started) or gerunds (Getting
> >   started)?
>
>

-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Different results for compilation Error in JS and SWF compilation

[Alex Harui]

The links do not work for me.

-Alex

On 1/24/18, 4:19 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

>Carlos,
>
>I know what causes the error :) I just wanted to know why the message
>provided by compiler is different :)
>
>Piotr
>
>2018-01-24 13:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :
>
>> there's a need for a final "h" here percentWidt
>>
>> so it seems something is wrong in the generation right?
>>
>>
>> 2018-01-24 13:08 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki :
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I have found that during SWF only compilation and JS only although I'm
>> > getting the same errors they are reported a bit differently.
>> >
>> > In build: compiler.targets=JSRoyale I got [1]
>> > In build: compiler.targets=SWF I got [2]
>> >
>> > There is no word "Error" in case of JSRoyale - Is this a bug ?
>> >
>> > [1] 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
>>ache.org%2FH7m7=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C86539a854146402e21510
>>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239319247711
>>78=I0RlFQKtU8QJ48nFi3Zv6e9gmrVHfTqUiCD0rHxOfYs%3D=0
>> > [2] 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.ap
>>ache.org%2FtvL9=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C86539a854146402e21510
>>8d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239319247711
>>78=3SB0VZjSQ3cq15PMeNK9hDtVEf2IQ2W76uM0jVyyiXo%3D=0
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > --
>> >
>> > Piotr Zarzycki
>> >
>> > Patreon: 
>>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pat
>>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C86539a854146
>>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
>>31924771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D
>>ed=0
>> > 
>>>reon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C86539a854146
>>402e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239
>>31924771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D
>>ed=0>*
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Carlos Rovira
>> 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%
>>2Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C86539a854146402e215108
>>d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C63652393192477117
>>8=poE7DnL3nCR3TiIdTKcZq3XiXERRt8230P6BLzjq0pc%3D=0
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>
>Piotr Zarzycki
>
>Patreon: 
>*https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patr
>eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C86539a85414640
>2e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239319
>24771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D=0
>eon.com%2Fpiotrzarzycki=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C86539a85414640
>2e215108d56324c4af%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C6365239319
>24771178=fMwSLPw1i2ucqETktb4PJRSg%2FFtnQRjQQbBBulFkWpg%3D=0
>>*

Cannot install royale-swf from npm

[Josh Tynjala]

I get the following console output when I run `npm install -g royale-swf`

https://paste.apache.org/xA7e

It appears that royale-asjs is missing from the path when running the 
`npm/dependencies/download_dependencies.js` script.

- Josh

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Alex Harui]

Hi Carlos,

Right now, the master branch is set up to use the Cayman theme.  When I
took a quick look at Cayman, it appeared to be under Creative Commons,
which makes it very difficult for us to use.  Unfortunately, just because
it is "Open Source" and on GitHub doesn't mean it is compatible with the
Apache License.  That was one reason I put in a docpage.html as the
initial template for the doc site.  If you can find a simple theme that
isn't under CC, then let's take a look at it, but every third party theme
seems to have lots of pieces and is going to have to get scrubbed which
takes us time thinking about legal stuff.  I believe we can incrementally
add to the initial template or make different templates over time and make
a first-class doc site without having to spend so much time scrubbing
other people's works.  I don't think people are going to care too much
about how cool our doc site is, at least not right now.  I don't think
there is a rush to make it cool.  On the other hand, we do want to make a
good first impression over at royale.a.o, which is why I'm glad you have
provided something great for that.

My 2 cents,
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 12:45 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Hi Alex, for this reason is better to go with a OS GitHub theme that only
>needs to use the colors, fonts and logos from our website. Those where
>selected by me and are not provided by the WP theme. The other main reason
>is that we need to use something done for that task with the maximum
>quality. And that is something we can develop ourselves from scratch
>without invest lots of time.
>
>2018-01-24 5:10 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :
>
>> Personally, I would be very cautious about WP themes or copying
>> look-and-feel of other sites.  I would like our doc to be license-able
>> under ALv2 and not run into IP and licensing issues.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 1/23/18, 3:11 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos
>>Rovira"
>>  wrote:
>>
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >I tried to read through this thread, but many mails to catch all whats
>> >happening at the moment, and just want to say a couple of things:
>> >
>> >1.- Regarding TOC, I think it's ok (in a quick review, I should work a
>>bit
>> >on docs too to see how this works). But as anything, I assume that
>>it's a
>> >starting point and we should be working on it a evolving it as we
>> >experience it.
>> >
>> >2.- Although Flex doc is a good start I want to point as well to
>>React[1]
>> >and Angular[2] to compare with what we want to do to get/copy ideas on
>>how
>> >they are doing things and help to get same level of quality and/or even
>> >improve over it. I use to always reference this two projects since are
>>the
>> >standard right now in any aspect and we should compare what we do with
>> >those.
>> >
>> >React seems to use Github pages as well and the index/menu systems
>>seems
>> >very appropriate.
>> >
>> >3.- I think we should use that kind of layout and not try to "emulate"
>>the
>> >exact look and feel in our site. I think that would not result in
>> >something
>> >cool in the end. To do that I'll go directly the most easy way that is
>>to
>> >do it in WP instance in no time. We are trying to use Gihub Pages to
>>get
>> >something like [2] and that's done with a GitHub pages documentation
>> >already done. With that in place we only need to change some colors (to
>> >oranges and blues) and fonts, and add royale logo to match website, but
>> >getting something unique for our docs.
>> >
>> >Hope to get soon to this and could help in this task.
>> >
>> >Thanks
>> >
>> >
>> >[1]
>> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Freactjs.o
>> >rg%2Fdocs%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
>> 7Cb2e14e4d2a974d55307108d56
>> >2b6bb97%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C636523459331863020
>> >ata=eJA6clo4TdLGQqSA2KQf400woq2tw0%2BLq%2F0Di8eCnDc%3D=0
>> >[2]
>> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
>> https%3A%2F%2Fangular.i
>> 
>>>o%2Fdocs=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb2e14e4d2a974d55307108d562b
>>>6
>> b
>> >b97%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
>> 7C636523459331863020=
>> >ESznd%2FS49ExgogHbPN9HIF%2B4iHI%2FxwX5Tqw4xnndkSQ%3D=0
>> >
>> >2018-01-23 22:30 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>> >
>> >> I have set up 2FA and presume I have to wait a while until GitHub
>> >>notices.
>> >> In the mean time I may create another page or two offline...
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Andrew Wetmore 
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I have requested my authentication code, but it seems to be slow
>> >> > arriving...Will wait.
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Alex Harui
>>> >
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Hi Andrew,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Infra did more checking and says that you 

Re: Directory and File naming conventions

[Alex Harui]

HI Andrew,

Good question.  I'm pretty sure I don't care as long as it meets usability
goals.  Maybe you already know what usability goals a "help docs" site
should have, but maybe we should first agree on usability goals and work
backwards to how the directory and file names affect that if at all.  I
didn't know how Jekyll worked when first putting together the skeleton so
I picked spaces (%20) just as a guess.

I think the usability goals are something like:
A) what shows up as the page/tab title?
B) What do the links look like?
C) Do search engines care?
D) What do the links look like in search engine results?
E) What do the links look like when hovering over them? Or in Bookmarks?
F) Do people have expectations around uppercase, lowercase, sentence case,
etc?
G) What will screen readers read to vision-impaired people?

Other user-facing issues?

I believe I've learned that in Jekyll the title is in the "front matter"
and is independent of the file name.  If you want to make some changes and
test that out, feel free.

I don't know if folks would rather see "_" instead of %20 in links.  Or
even Camel Case: GettingStarted.html.

Thoughts?
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 7:34 AM, "Andrew Wetmore"  wrote:

>This is for the help documentation, but maybe there are already some
>conventions in place for the code base that we should follow.
>
>
>   1. Are we using all lower case, sentence case (Getting started), or
>   initial caps (Getting Started) for directory and file names?
>   2. Are we using sentence case or initial caps for the title at the top
>   of each help doc's text?
>   3. Are we using underscores (Getting_Started) or HTML code
>(Getting%20Started)?
>   I see the former in the code for the web page and the latter for the
>help
>   docs.
>   4. Are we using declarative verbs (Get started) or gerunds (Getting
>   started)?
>
>My preferences would be
>
>   1. Sentence case
>   2. Sentence case
>   3. Underscores
>   4. Declarative
>
>but I am the new kid on the block.
>
>Whatever is the Royale way for these matters, I want to declare it in the
>README for the doc project so other contributors have four fewer things to
>stall over
>
>a
>
>-- 
>Andrew Wetmore
>
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14.
>blogspot.com%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb24a282adf9b448995cd08
>d5633ff1cd%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636524048646177645
>=nhqu4NYTGm7xmMiAuKP2FTP6mtTK97iz8RPcWrrjbQg%3D=0

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Andrew Wetmore]

I am even rewriting the legacy Apache Flex stuff I think we can reuse.
Apart from issues of licenses, I don't want to trample on other writers by
stealing, as opposing to learning from, their material.

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Alex Harui 
wrote:

> Again, please be careful when copying anything you find on the internet.
> I still think we want to make our doc licensed under the Apache License
> and lots of web stuff is Creative Commons.  The "best" stuff may be under
> copyrights and other licenses and require attributions that make more work
> for the PMC.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 1/24/18, 3:52 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
>  wrote:
>
> >Right, when I planned the website, I was learning as well from that
> >websites and apache websites, and copying, mixing from here and there was
> >how I did the current one.
> >I think we should take the test of those for our docs to get the best we
> >can.
> >
> >thanks! :)
> >
> >2018-01-24 12:35 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
> >
> >> Thanks for the pointer about the React and Angular sites, Carlos. Lots
> >>to
> >> learn from!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andrew Wetmore
> >>
> >>
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14
> >>.blogspot.com%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cedbe48562d0b47eebd89
> >>08d56320f1ba%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636523915525738
> >>959=xi8kK5YPZ5C%2BS2qAKVYKW6gxNcxBZEbYJVk4nzctPE8%3D=0
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Carlos Rovira
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
> >Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cedbe48562d0b47eebd8908d5
> >6320f1ba%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636523915525738959
> >data=kt8vhFE%2FkrzZhTvRznRq2rKxhdxxvtlpArlslBgSTL8%3D=0
>
>


-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Alex Harui]

Again, please be careful when copying anything you find on the internet.
I still think we want to make our doc licensed under the Apache License
and lots of web stuff is Creative Commons.  The "best" stuff may be under
copyrights and other licenses and require attributions that make more work
for the PMC.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 1/24/18, 3:52 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
 wrote:

>Right, when I planned the website, I was learning as well from that
>websites and apache websites, and copying, mixing from here and there was
>how I did the current one.
>I think we should take the test of those for our docs to get the best we
>can.
>
>thanks! :)
>
>2018-01-24 12:35 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
>
>> Thanks for the pointer about the React and Angular sites, Carlos. Lots
>>to
>> learn from!
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andrew Wetmore
>>
>> 
>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14
>>.blogspot.com%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cedbe48562d0b47eebd89
>>08d56320f1ba%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636523915525738
>>959=xi8kK5YPZ5C%2BS2qAKVYKW6gxNcxBZEbYJVk4nzctPE8%3D=0
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Carlos Rovira
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2
>Fcarlosrovira=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cedbe48562d0b47eebd8908d5
>6320f1ba%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636523915525738959
>data=kt8vhFE%2FkrzZhTvRznRq2rKxhdxxvtlpArlslBgSTL8%3D=0

Directory and File naming conventions

[Andrew Wetmore]

This is for the help documentation, but maybe there are already some
conventions in place for the code base that we should follow.


   1. Are we using all lower case, sentence case (Getting started), or
   initial caps (Getting Started) for directory and file names?
   2. Are we using sentence case or initial caps for the title at the top
   of each help doc's text?
   3. Are we using underscores (Getting_Started) or HTML code
(Getting%20Started)?
   I see the former in the code for the web page and the latter for the help
   docs.
   4. Are we using declarative verbs (Get started) or gerunds (Getting
   started)?

My preferences would be

   1. Sentence case
   2. Sentence case
   3. Underscores
   4. Declarative

but I am the new kid on the block.

Whatever is the Royale way for these matters, I want to declare it in the
README for the doc project so other contributors have four fewer things to
stall over

a

-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Different results for compilation Error in JS and SWF compilation

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Carlos,

I know what causes the error :) I just wanted to know why the message
provided by compiler is different :)

Piotr

2018-01-24 13:18 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira :

> there's a need for a final "h" here percentWidt
>
> so it seems something is wrong in the generation right?
>
>
> 2018-01-24 13:08 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have found that during SWF only compilation and JS only although I'm
> > getting the same errors they are reported a bit differently.
> >
> > In build: compiler.targets=JSRoyale I got [1]
> > In build: compiler.targets=SWF I got [2]
> >
> > There is no word "Error" in case of JSRoyale - Is this a bug ?
> >
> > [1] https://paste.apache.org/H7m7
> > [2] https://paste.apache.org/tvL9
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --
> >
> > Piotr Zarzycki
> >
> > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> > *
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>



-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

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

Re: Different results for compilation Error in JS and SWF compilation

[Carlos Rovira]

there's a need for a final "h" here percentWidt

so it seems something is wrong in the generation right?


2018-01-24 13:08 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki :

> Hi,
>
> I have found that during SWF only compilation and JS only although I'm
> getting the same errors they are reported a bit differently.
>
> In build: compiler.targets=JSRoyale I got [1]
> In build: compiler.targets=SWF I got [2]
>
> There is no word "Error" in case of JSRoyale - Is this a bug ?
>
> [1] https://paste.apache.org/H7m7
> [2] https://paste.apache.org/tvL9
>
> Thanks,
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> *
>



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

Different results for compilation Error in JS and SWF compilation

[Piotr Zarzycki]

Hi,

I have found that during SWF only compilation and JS only although I'm
getting the same errors they are reported a bit differently.

In build: compiler.targets=JSRoyale I got [1]
In build: compiler.targets=SWF I got [2]

There is no word "Error" in case of JSRoyale - Is this a bug ?

[1] https://paste.apache.org/H7m7
[2] https://paste.apache.org/tvL9

Thanks,
-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

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

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Carlos Rovira]

Right, when I planned the website, I was learning as well from that
websites and apache websites, and copying, mixing from here and there was
how I did the current one.
I think we should take the test of those for our docs to get the best we
can.

thanks! :)

2018-01-24 12:35 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :

> Thanks for the pointer about the React and Angular sites, Carlos. Lots to
> learn from!
>
>
>
> --
> Andrew Wetmore
>
> http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
>



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

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Andrew Wetmore]

Thanks for the pointer about the React and Angular sites, Carlos. Lots to
learn from!



-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Carlos Rovira]

Great Andrew! :)))

2018-01-24 12:33 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :

> Hi!
>
> Yes, I feel like a real committer now.
>
> I am going to migrate some material from the FlexJS documentation to see
> what that experience is like. I am going to draw from "Overview" [1]
>  >
> to populate both "High level view" and the third-level "Migrate from Flex"
> under "Create an application".
>
> I have added a note about the "front matter" to the README file.
>
> Will take a look at your changes to the ToC structure before adding other
> page entries.
>
> This is fun!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [1]
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=34013930
>
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 3:50 AM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Andrew,
> >
> > Looks like your commit privileges are working.
> >
> > I think we need to coordinate so we don't step on each others toes.  I'm
> > thinking I will add a bit to Features and Concepts so it links to its
> > children (AS3, MXML, PAYG, Strand and Beads) so I can make sure the
> > third-level of the TOC works, then move on to Create An Application as
> > that's where I want to spend more time building out some sort of app "in
> > 10 minutes".  Ideas for what to put in that app are welcome from anybody.
> > I don't want it to just be "Hello World".  Maybe hit the network or a
> JSON
> > file.  Or maybe I'll spend some time on ASDoc instead and come back to
> > this later.
> >
> > Couple of other things:
> > I reviewed your commits.  All .MD files need the "Front Matter".  See one
> > of the .MD files I did and copy and modify the first lines with the
> dashed
> > lines.  See Jekyll doc to understand it better.
> >
> > I just pushed a significant change to the pattern for new TOC entries in
> > docpage.html so please sync up before making more changes to that file.
> >
> > The main Welcome page is currently in index.md, not in Welcome/index.md.
> > The TOC does not point to Welcome/index.html.  I'm not sure that's right
> > so we might need to tweak how that works.  A related issue is that I
> think
> > you wanted only the top-level TOC items visible when you first landed at
> > the doc, but that means that clicking on a TOC link doesn't expand to
> show
> > child pages in the TOC, otherwise the Welcome would be expanded and show
> > High Level and Features and push Get Started further down.  If we do have
> > a different /index.html as the landing page and Welcome in the TOC opens
> > Welcome/index.html, then we can have clicking a TOC link show the child
> > pages in the TOC.
> >
> > Another thing on my to-do list is to figure out how to use media query to
> > hide the TOC behind a menu button when the screen isn't wide enough.  Not
> > sure how important that is at this time.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > -Alex
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Andrew Wetmore
>
> http://cottage14.blogspot.com/
>



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

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Andrew Wetmore]

Hi!

Yes, I feel like a real committer now.

I am going to migrate some material from the FlexJS documentation to see
what that experience is like. I am going to draw from "Overview" [1]

to populate both "High level view" and the third-level "Migrate from Flex"
under "Create an application".

I have added a note about the "front matter" to the README file.

Will take a look at your changes to the ToC structure before adding other
page entries.

This is fun!







[1]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=34013930

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 3:50 AM, Alex Harui 
wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> Looks like your commit privileges are working.
>
> I think we need to coordinate so we don't step on each others toes.  I'm
> thinking I will add a bit to Features and Concepts so it links to its
> children (AS3, MXML, PAYG, Strand and Beads) so I can make sure the
> third-level of the TOC works, then move on to Create An Application as
> that's where I want to spend more time building out some sort of app "in
> 10 minutes".  Ideas for what to put in that app are welcome from anybody.
> I don't want it to just be "Hello World".  Maybe hit the network or a JSON
> file.  Or maybe I'll spend some time on ASDoc instead and come back to
> this later.
>
> Couple of other things:
> I reviewed your commits.  All .MD files need the "Front Matter".  See one
> of the .MD files I did and copy and modify the first lines with the dashed
> lines.  See Jekyll doc to understand it better.
>
> I just pushed a significant change to the pattern for new TOC entries in
> docpage.html so please sync up before making more changes to that file.
>
> The main Welcome page is currently in index.md, not in Welcome/index.md.
> The TOC does not point to Welcome/index.html.  I'm not sure that's right
> so we might need to tweak how that works.  A related issue is that I think
> you wanted only the top-level TOC items visible when you first landed at
> the doc, but that means that clicking on a TOC link doesn't expand to show
> child pages in the TOC, otherwise the Welcome would be expanded and show
> High Level and Features and push Get Started further down.  If we do have
> a different /index.html as the landing page and Welcome in the TOC opens
> Welcome/index.html, then we can have clicking a TOC link show the child
> pages in the TOC.
>
> Another thing on my to-do list is to figure out how to use media query to
> hide the TOC behind a menu button when the screen isn't wide enough.  Not
> sure how important that is at this time.
>
> Thoughts?
> -Alex
>
>
>


-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/

Re: Proposed table of contents for Royale help documentation

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi Alex, for this reason is better to go with a OS GitHub theme that only
needs to use the colors, fonts and logos from our website. Those where
selected by me and are not provided by the WP theme. The other main reason
is that we need to use something done for that task with the maximum
quality. And that is something we can develop ourselves from scratch
without invest lots of time.

2018-01-24 5:10 GMT+01:00 Alex Harui :

> Personally, I would be very cautious about WP themes or copying
> look-and-feel of other sites.  I would like our doc to be license-able
> under ALv2 and not run into IP and licensing issues.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 1/23/18, 3:11 PM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of Carlos Rovira"
>  wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >I tried to read through this thread, but many mails to catch all whats
> >happening at the moment, and just want to say a couple of things:
> >
> >1.- Regarding TOC, I think it's ok (in a quick review, I should work a bit
> >on docs too to see how this works). But as anything, I assume that it's a
> >starting point and we should be working on it a evolving it as we
> >experience it.
> >
> >2.- Although Flex doc is a good start I want to point as well to React[1]
> >and Angular[2] to compare with what we want to do to get/copy ideas on how
> >they are doing things and help to get same level of quality and/or even
> >improve over it. I use to always reference this two projects since are the
> >standard right now in any aspect and we should compare what we do with
> >those.
> >
> >React seems to use Github pages as well and the index/menu systems seems
> >very appropriate.
> >
> >3.- I think we should use that kind of layout and not try to "emulate" the
> >exact look and feel in our site. I think that would not result in
> >something
> >cool in the end. To do that I'll go directly the most easy way that is to
> >do it in WP instance in no time. We are trying to use Gihub Pages to get
> >something like [2] and that's done with a GitHub pages documentation
> >already done. With that in place we only need to change some colors (to
> >oranges and blues) and fonts, and add royale logo to match website, but
> >getting something unique for our docs.
> >
> >Hope to get soon to this and could help in this task.
> >
> >Thanks
> >
> >
> >[1]
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Freactjs.o
> >rg%2Fdocs%2F=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%
> 7Cb2e14e4d2a974d55307108d56
> >2b6bb97%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636523459331863020
> >ata=eJA6clo4TdLGQqSA2KQf400woq2tw0%2BLq%2F0Di8eCnDc%3D=0
> >[2]
> >https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fangular.i
> >o%2Fdocs=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cb2e14e4d2a974d55307108d562b6
> b
> >b97%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636523459331863020=
> >ESznd%2FS49ExgogHbPN9HIF%2B4iHI%2FxwX5Tqw4xnndkSQ%3D=0
> >
> >2018-01-23 22:30 GMT+01:00 Andrew Wetmore :
> >
> >> I have set up 2FA and presume I have to wait a while until GitHub
> >>notices.
> >> In the mean time I may create another page or two offline...
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Andrew Wetmore 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I have requested my authentication code, but it seems to be slow
> >> > arriving...Will wait.
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Alex Harui  >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi Andrew,
> >> >>
> >> >> Infra did more checking and says that you haven't enabled 2FA on GH
> >> which
> >> >> is why you are being denied. The links below may help you do that.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fhelp.git
> >>hub.com%2Farticles%2Fsecuring-your-account-with-&
> data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40
> >>adobe.com%7Cb2e14e4d2a974d55307108d562b6bb97%
> 7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178
> >>decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636523459331863020=Q2ze2F5qsl6bUfvex6mAxuXFbpbtmp
> U
> >>7Mw2Ntb3pOBY%3D=0
> >> >> two-factor-auth
> >> >> entication-2fa/
> >> >>
> >> https%3A%2F%2Fhelp.gi
> >>thub.com%2Farticles%2Fsecuring-your-=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> %7C
> >>b2e14e4d2a974d55307108d562b6bb97%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7C0%7
> >>C0%7C636523459331863020=U%2BkahP6uVxrBuGG6pcvI1QgJqHayIv
> cwYQF7WWswi
> >>zs%3D=0
> >> account-with-two-factor-authentication-2fa/>
> >> >>
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Fhelp.git
> >>hub.com%2Farticles%2Fproviding-your-2fa-=02%7C01%7Caharui%
> 40adobe.co
> >>m%7Cb2e14e4d2a974d55307108d562b6bb97%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> cee1%7
> >>C0%7C0%7C636523459331863020=xQLEPxW3yhH%
> 2FqIRe2BHn0Ly%2Fm4cki9p4hst
> >>4H8XH%2BV8%3D=0
> >> authentication-code/
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> > Andrew Wetmore
> >> >
> >> >
> >>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fcottage14
>