Re: Apache Royale Maven improvements, fixes and reproducible builds PR by Chris Dutz

2019-11-18 Thread Alex Harui
Reponding to this post inline. But first, some responses to other posts: @piotr, I have not reviewed all of the commits in the PRs, but the first one I looked at removed JGit and Wagon which are used by the release steps. Maybe they got restored in later commits. I don't know. But if they

Re: Apache Royale Maven improvements, fixes and reproducible builds PR by Chris Dutz

2019-11-18 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
Carlos, I lost at least 3 payed days on having Upload artifacts on Windows using Maven and I have never successes with that. - It wasn't only me. - Uploading problem didn't gone for sure. Last release is just a proof. Anyway again I suggest you start learn how release process works, try and than

Re: Apache Royale Maven improvements, fixes and reproducible builds PR by Chris Dutz

2019-11-18 Thread Carlos Rovira
Hi, After the mavenizer is released there is no longer a need to use the settings-template.xml files at all and we can delete them. This is not related to the PRs, and is something we can do aside we need to revert the PRs or make other changes over it to improve what we have. The Maven build

Re: Apache Royale Maven improvements, fixes and reproducible builds PR by Chris Dutz

2019-11-18 Thread Harbs
If we’re supporting both ant and maven (and I think we should), building both should be part of a release. My $0.02, Harbs > On Nov 18, 2019, at 5:03 PM, Carlos Rovira wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > right, I don't want to start a discussion about deprecating ANT. I like > Maven but I think neither

Re: Apache Royale Maven improvements, fixes and reproducible builds PR by Chris Dutz

2019-11-18 Thread Carlos Rovira
Hi Alex, right, I don't want to start a discussion about deprecating ANT. I like Maven but I think neither Chris or I are wanting to remove ANT for building. Just thought an option could be to not involve ANT in the release process, but just in the users build process (that I thought is what we

Re: Apache Royale Maven improvements, fixes and reproducible builds PR by Chris Dutz

2019-11-18 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
Hi Alex, It is the 11 Maven steps that are what broke in the 1 PR commit I reviewed > so far. Are you saying that we have now 11 steps broken ? Am I understanding this correctly ? Thanks, Piotr pon., 18 lis 2019 o 10:49 Alex Harui napisał(a): > Fundamentally, I don't think we want to get

Re: Apache Royale Maven improvements, fixes and reproducible builds PR by Chris Dutz

2019-11-18 Thread Alex Harui
Fundamentally, I don't think we want to get rid of Ant or treat Ant as second-class. Some people still prefer Ant over Maven. We need to offer people choices. Not having a Maven-based release process (whatever that means) isn't the thing that new users are complaining about, IMO. You can

Re: Apache Royale Maven improvements, fixes and reproducible builds PR by Chris Dutz

2019-11-18 Thread Carlos Rovira
Hi Alex The Ant tasks are Java jar files, so the building has always been handled by the maven build. for testing, this is possible too as maven has the invoker plugin exactly for stuff like that. In order to actually test the tasks, some work is needed, but it's probably easier to do that than