Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi Piotr, I removed that part, please, check. As well I sent you private for access info thanks 2017-11-13 13:21 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki : > That's what I think so. > > I was trying to also login into account, but when I'm going to admin page > it doesn't ask me for

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

That's what I think so. I was trying to also login into account, but when I'm going to admin page it doesn't ask me for a new password, but rather redirect me to the login page. I tried to reset password, but it didn't help. Piotr 2017-11-13 13:11 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi Piotr, I'm fine with the decisions you would like to take regarding that links. I just setup an initial layout. So, if I understand well I must to remove only the status link? 2017-11-13 12:42 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki : > Carlos, > > I'm not convinced that we

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Carlos, I'm not convinced that we should move framework build from Alex's Azure PC. It is really convenient if something went wrong to just connect with the PC. If you would like to have distribution build under Apache umbrella you will need to fight with Infra about that. Maven is building on

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi Piotr, ok, as we are still in preview site, not published, I think is better to wait for the final link. One thing is confusing me is that status link is more legit ( builds.apache.org) than the nightly links (apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net) I think in a final stage we should not have

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

I'm sorry! CARLOS I meant :) 2017-11-12 20:04 GMT+01:00 Piotr Zarzycki : > Another thing is: "Apache Royale Jenkings Job Status" - This status > showing the state of Maven build which is hosted on builds.apache.org. > Since we are using Alex's machine for producing

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Another thing is: "Apache Royale Jenkings Job Status" - This status showing the state of Maven build which is hosted on builds.apache.org. Since we are using Alex's machine for producing ditribution package for developers we should not have it this link on the website. Maven is able to build

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi Carlos, Here you go links to Royale. I see proper names. Royale [1] JS Only [2]. I did just quick look and when I came to the website I started to search this information that Nightly is not for production. After w while I have found this red rectangle. I think font size could be a bit bigger

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi, here's the download page for you to review. http://royale.codeoscopic.com/download/ Some things to mention: * As we already don't have release binaries, the first section could be consider under construction * For nightly builds I use the links posted by Alex in October. I think those

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi Alex, as in lots of things in life I think we should get to some point in the middle. I think it would be bad if we try to make lots of components in few time, since as you said, we don't know what things people will need nowadays. I like your point about "we don't need to mimic Flex 4.x", for

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

In general, I agree with everything said here, but I would like to clarify that the "better than last" also needs to address known shortcomings. E.g. Dave's example, GPL has been with us for quite a while, but we now know about it, we can't simply "well, the release is better than last one, so

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Well, I would love to be wrong about "few years", but I know I wouldn't bet any money on knowing what components and features our users who are migrating from Flex are going to need. And I would hope we don't have to say to any users "well, we don't have that component/feature so too bad", unless

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi, could someone post here the links to post in downloads page for now? Thanks! 2017-11-10 23:57 GMT+01:00 Dave Fisher : > +1. > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Nov 10, 2017, at 2:01 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala > wrote: > > > > I think it is okay for

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi, I agree with this, but want to expose some thoughts that I consider important: I think we must to cut a release as we get in the same similar stable state as we had in FlexJS (0.8.0), and call it 0.8.0, since this is only a transition release to get in our new house, but we still have some

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi - I agree it is intent and trust. A couple of incidents in the long history of POI. (1) we discovered a GPL file that had been in the source tree for a couple of releases and removed it. (2) we had a complaint from the copyright holder that a test file belonged to him. It had been there

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi Dave, It would help to make license problems rare if we also do something else Roy has mentioned recently that has to do with trust and intent. If you dig hard enough, or take an "untrusting" philosophy that if something isn't perfectly documented that someone is going to use that

Re: Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Hi - For source code we can point to github from the website. For nightly builds we can let people know about it on dev@ but should not link to it from the website. We can explain on the website or wiki that we are doing nightly builds and that they can find out from the dev@ list. At this

Release Philosophy (was Re: [Website] Getting content ready to publish)

Forking this specific issue about nightly builds... AIUI, this issue about nightly builds has arisen before with other projects. I'd have to go through board@/member@ archives but I think some projects have found some pretty clever solutions to linking to nightly builds. That said, one of the