Re: Royale_Release_Step_002 - Build # 7 - Still Failing!

So if you don't opposite I'll try to see how to install gpg.exe El lun., 25 nov. 2019 a las 6:18, Alex Harui () escribió: > It has never worked on apacheroyalebuilds2, it only worked on > apacheroyalebuilds which was decommissioned in the test to see if we know > what we need to rebuild a CI

IDataGridView in Basic instead of Core

Hi, is right to have IDataGridView in Basic instead of Core? We use to have interfaces in Core. If this is right I can move from one Basic to Core -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira

Jenkins build is back to normal : royale-asjs_jsonly #272

See

RE: IDataGridView in Basic instead of Core

It appears to me like a question of how much energy we want to invest in abstractions. If we can make a good abstraction that is likely to be used in most component sets, then it should belong in Core. But I’m not sure if that’s the case for Basic’s IDataGridView. From: Carlos

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_jsonly #271

See Changes: [noreply] Update asconfig.json to include resources/assets directory in the output -- [...truncated 1.16 MB...] [java]

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #204

See Changes: -- [...truncated 1.17 MB...] [mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IFill [mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SolidColor [mxmlc] scanning

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 9 - Still Failing!

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 9 - Still Failing: Check console output at http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/job/Royale_Release_Step_N002/9/ to view the results.

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 11 - Still Failing!

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 11 - Still Failing: Check console output at http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/job/Royale_Release_Step_N002/11/ to view the results.

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 12 - Still Failing!

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 12 - Still Failing: Check console output at http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/job/Royale_Release_Step_N002/12/ to view the results.

Re: IDataGridView in Basic instead of Core

Hi Carlos, Are you going to use this interface in future work on Jewel DataGrid ? Thanks, Piotr pon., 25 lis 2019 o 16:48 Yishay Weiss napisał(a): > It appears to me like a question of how much energy we want to invest in > abstractions. If we can make a good abstraction that is likely to be

Jenkins build is back to normal : royale-compiler #85

See

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 6 - Still Failing!

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 6 - Still Failing: Check console output at http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/job/Royale_Release_Step_N002/6/ to view the results.

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-compiler #84

See Changes: [carlosrovira] add debug profile to pom -- [...truncated 326.06 KB...] [java] Warning: pattern

Royale_Release_Step_002 - Build # 8 - Still Failing!

Royale_Release_Step_002 - Build # 8 - Still Failing: Check console output at http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/job/Royale_Release_Step_002/8/ to view the results.

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 7 - Still Failing!

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 7 - Still Failing: Check console output at http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/job/Royale_Release_Step_N002/7/ to view the results.

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #205

See Changes: [noreply] Update asconfig.json to include resources/assets directory in the output -- [...truncated 1.17 MB...] [mxmlc]

Re: IDataGridView in Basic instead of Core

I think it would be ok. Move it there. Make sure that basic example of DataGrid is working fine. pon., 25 lis 2019 o 19:18 Carlos Rovira napisał(a): > Hi, > > yes I'm working on Jewel DataGrid this days, so this question is around > that. It seems to me that the interface seems ok for Basic and

Re: IDataGridView in Basic instead of Core

On 11/25/19, 7:48 AM, "Yishay Weiss" wrote: It appears to me like a question of how much energy we want to invest in abstractions. If we can make a good abstraction that is likely to be used in most component sets, then it should belong in Core. But I’m not sure if that’s the case for

Re: IDataGridView in Basic instead of Core

Hi, yes I'm working on Jewel DataGrid this days, so this question is around that. It seems to me that the interface seems ok for Basic and Jewel DataGrid, since Jewel use to be based in part on Basic philosophy. So if I understand correctly, if I use in Jewel I can move it to Core right? This is

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 13 - Still Failing!

Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 13 - Still Failing: Check console output at http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/job/Royale_Release_Step_N002/13/ to view the results.

Re: Royale_Release_Step_N002 - Build # 13 - Still Failing!

Hi, just installed Gpg4Win on CI Server. Now the log fails since it reports no there's no secret key, what is ok, since there's nothing about it in the entire process. [INFO] gpg: no default secret key: No secret key [INFO] gpg: signing failed: No secret key So I don't really understand why we

Jenkins build is back to normal : royale-asjs_MXTests #206

See