Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

For reference, here was the last time this general topic was discussed. https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/8fb289e83938786a1b7e3887c07bb48936e25141e6fbdb1c915ab6f5@%3Cdev.flex.apache.org%3E

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Ahh... Really ? I din't know. I just pushed changes but will get back to the Apache header later today. Thanks Harbs! 2017-11-08 15:32 GMT+01:00 Harbs : > We’ve been through this before. > > It wasn’t. > > It was part of the Adobe donation and donated under Apache 2. > >

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

We’ve been through this before. It wasn’t. It was part of the Adobe donation and donated under Apache 2. Harbs > On Nov 8, 2017, at 10:09 AM, Justin Mclean wrote: > > Hi, > > Is seem a little odd that the BSD licensed file here [1] has been copied into > our repo with

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Om, It look like I will cut another RC, but I would be really appreciate if you try current one with Nightly on Windows. Thank you! Piotr 2017-11-08 9:49 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki : > Thank you. If I decide to cut another release I will fix that as you said. > >

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Thank you. If I decide to cut another release I will fix that as you said. Piotr 2017-11-08 9:45 GMT+01:00 Justin Mclean : > Hi, > > > So solution is that the header should be copied from your [1] to [2] ? > > I think the best way to sort this would be to re-add the BSD

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Hi, > So solution is that the header should be copied from your [1] to [2] ? I think the best way to sort this would be to re-add the BSD header or a least a pointer to it in a comment and the BSD file to LICENSE. [1] Thanks, Justin 1.

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Hi Om, Could you please try to do one more test and try to install Nightly Build? I will check windows installer once again later today. Maybe I will have to cut another RC. :/ Let me know. Thanks! Piotr 2017-11-08 8:07 GMT+01:00 OmPrakash Muppirala : > Testing on

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

I just tried on Mac end everything on my End is working, so not sure what is wrong. Alex also did tests on his Mac as I see in the VOTE thread it also worked. Piotr 2017-11-08 9:29 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki : > Hi, > > So solution is that the header should be copied

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Hi, So solution is that the header should be copied from your [1] to [2] ? Piotr 2017-11-08 9:09 GMT+01:00 Justin Mclean : > Hi, > > A few other questions. > > Is there any reason the installer is defaulting to version 23 of AIR/Flash > rather than a later version? > >

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Hi, I’m seeing a number of failures: For version 4.16.0 / FP 23.0 - I though it could be a bad mirror? Installer version 3.3.0 (mac) Using Locale: en_AU Fetched the SDK download mirror URL from the CGI. SDK version Apache Flex SDK 4.16.0 AIR version 23.0 Flash Player version 23.0 Creating

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Hi, A few other questions. Is there any reason the installer is defaulting to version 23 of AIR/Flash rather than a later version? Looks like the CONTRIBUTORS file was not updated. Is seem a little odd that the BSD licensed file here [1] has been copied into our repo with an ASF header.

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Testing on Windows 10. I am seeing this error: Installer version 3.3.0 (windows) Using Locale: en_US Fetched the SDK download mirror URL from the CGI. SDK version Apache Flex SDK 4.16.0 AIR version 23.0 Flash Player version 23.0 Creating Apache Flex home Creating temporary directory Downloading

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

AFAICT, the releasecandidate.xml is not signing the binaries, it is calling build.xml to build and sign the binaries, tag the repo, etc. It is just scripting the steps an RM would otherwise do manually. -Alex On 11/7/17, 8:40 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" wrote: >Hi Alex, >

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Never mind I figure out why there is sign in releasecandidate.xml. Thanks, Piotr 2017-11-07 17:40 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki : > Hi Alex, > > Just move our discussion here. I was started to think more about that - > since our build.xml script is signing our binary

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1*

Hi Alex, Just move our discussion here. I was started to think more about that - since our build.xml script is signing our binary artifacts, why we are doing this once again in releasecandidate.xml script ? What actually is the purpose ? Thanks, Piotr 2017-11-06 20:49 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1

Hi Piotr, Well, it is up to you, but by helping to debug and improve these scripts we should save time for the next release candidate, next release manager, and the people who might review the RCs. I don't think releasecandidate.xml actually does the signing, I think it calls the main build.xml

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1

Alex, I was trying to use that script but. It's stuck on signing on Windows (just hung) and after almost 4 hours of setup things on Mac script was failing for me on SVN commit. I did went through almost whole process with that script, so for someone who had this one configured in his machine it

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1

Piotr, I don’t know if you are still trying to use releasecandidate.xml, but it should have generated templates for these emails with different subjects for you. HTH, -Alex On 11/6/17, 11:40 AM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"

Re: [Discuss] Release Apache Flex SDK Installer 3.3 - RC1

Piotr, sorry for the annoyance, but in Gmail, these two threads show up merged. In the past, we usually add a few extra characters like *** to force separate threads. Otherwise this will quickly lead to confusion :-) Thanks, Om On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Piotr Zarzycki