Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #636

[Apache Royale CI Server]

See 


--
[...truncated 2.03 MB...]
[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

Jenkins build is back to normal : royale-asjs_jsonly #2762

[Apache Royale CI Server]

See 

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #635

[Apache Royale CI Server]

See 


Changes:

[aharui] changes to skip building SWCs for SWF by default.  Use -P

--
[...truncated 2.03 MB...]
[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

RE: CreationComplete event question

[Kessler CTR Mark J]

>That said, based on the code snippets provided, I'm not sure why 
>"initComplete" fired before addElement, which is what I think you are trying 
>to point out.  I would expect it to be called in addElement, so further 
>investigation is needed there.  Put a breakpoint in your "initComplete" 
>handler and see what the call stack is.  addedToParent() should be on the call 
>stack.

Correct I wasn't being clear enough.  Yes the "initComplete" was firing 
before the addElement from our original problem.  After setting up a new test 
application I couldn't produce it again.  Manually deleted the debug folder of 
the other test app and rebuilt it, it was working fine.  I think that quick 
compile/debug combo leaves debris sometimes.   I checked the call stack anyways 
for the event handler "initComplete" and it  had addedToParent in it.   So well 
just blame the bin/output and the guy failing to manually cleaning it out (me) 
.  


Thank you for taking the time to respond.  Sorry for the confusion.


-Mark K

-Original Message-
From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com.INVALID] 
Sent: Monday, April 1, 2019 12:29 PM
To: dev@royale.apache.org
Subject: [Non-DoD Source] Re: CreationComplete event question

I haven't really followed this thread in detail so apologies if I'm missing the 
point.

Hopefully, FlexJS/Royale has never promised 100% backward compatibility with 
Flex.  That's because there are some fundamental differences in the 
runtimes/platforms.  In Flash, if you change properties of a DisplayObject, the 
effects show up after all other code runs.  In the browser, if you change 
properties on an HTMLElement, it shows up right away in many cases.  So 
lifecycle events and invalidation are not being promised to work exactly as 
they did in Flex.  It would add a lot of overhead to try to emulate the 
deferred rendering of Flash in the browser.

"initComplete" in Royale isn't quite the exact same as "creationComplete" in 
Flex.  Both give you a place to run some code as the component is initialized, 
but there may be subtle differences if you depended on deferred validation in 
Flex.

That said, based on the code snippets provided, I'm not sure why "initComplete" 
fired before addElement, which is what I think you are trying to point out.  I 
would expect it to be called in addElement, so further investigation is needed 
there.  Put a breakpoint in your "initComplete" handler and see what the call 
stack is.  addedToParent() should be on the call stack.

HTH,
-Alex

Re: 0.9.6 Release

[Alex Harui]

Update:

In order to make verification of binary release packages created on the server 
easier, I have made changes to our build scripts and tools to try to generate 
reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different builds compare on my Mac.   The 
next challenge will be to see if the server can build a package on Windows that 
will compare on Mac.

One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The version of JBurg we use 
generates method names including a hash that doesn't reproduce the same name 
each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg is currently under CPL 
which is category B.  We only need one file, we don't need or want all of JBurg 
at this time.  The one JBurg file is jointly owned by Adobe and Tom Harwood.  
I've contact Tom and he will be filing an ICLA and has given me permission to 
commit the lines he owns in that one file.

This is the revision of the file that will be donated by Tom/Adobe. 
https://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java

Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method names the same, 
there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can try cutting a 
release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May, so now is the time 
to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:

I would much rather have others find and fix issues themselves.  That way, 
more people than just me will know how to maintain the system.  It actually 
turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work on the release.  There are 14 
steps.  Literally, 14 different people could execute one step each.

My 2 cents,
-Alex

On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:

Hi Alex,

amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)

I need to put my head on all of this, but count on me to be a RM. I 
think
the best thing should be that you be the first RM to try your own
development at least for the first time, and then the rest of us will
follow you on the next releases. With all this on place we maybe could
release once a month or every two months...

Thanks for doing this :)

Carlos


El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui ()
escribió:

> OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps to build the release
> artifacts.  Folks interested in Docker-izing the steps are welcome to 
look
> at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on the CI server.
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com%3A8080%2Fview%2FRoyale%2520Release%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C46d1fe9de1214422ce9f08d6a3aec4d2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876368352984672&sdata=iVyd9X1U0qVPwCk0ZW9xa7YsPp64EgAxgIwljR7VbNs%3D&reserved=0
>
> These steps assume that the RM can run the basic Maven and Ant build 
on
> the RM's computer. I think that's a fair requirement since all of us 
on the
> PMC need to able to do that to build the RC in order to vote on it.
>  Jenkins does other tasks like run the Maven release plugin steps.
>
> Currently that results in binaries on Jenkins that are downloaded to 
the
> RM's computer.  These binaries need to be verified by the RM which is 
the
> next phase I will be starting on now.  The RM verifies the bits and 
then
> PGP signs them.  And then the bits are uploaded off the RM's computer 
to
> Maven Staging or dist.a.o/dev.   If that uploading turns out to be a 
point
> of failure, we have the option of having Jenkins upload the big files 
and
> have the RM only upload PGP signature files.  Or finding a way for 
Jenkins
> to get the signature files from the RM.  The uploads worked fine for 
me,
> but then again, so did the old script's uploads.
>
> Therefore, once I get the binary verification phase completed, I think
> someone other than me should be the RM and try to use these steps to
> generate the release and help debug the process for the next RM.  So,
> please try to carve out some time to be the RM.  One advantage of 
doing
> most of the work on Jenkins is that it frees up my computer to do 
other
> things while Jenkins is cranking away.
>
> I think we're at least a week away from binary verification, maybe 
two, so
> it is time to start thinking about what is going in this release.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/7/19, 4:15 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
> In case you haven't guessed, I'm testing out Jenkins and its 
ability
> to create the artifacts and send emails.  Please ignore any email

Re: Remote Object and Coldfusion

[Carlos Rovira]

Hi,

yes, in theory RemoteObject in MXRoyale (use this instead the one in
Network swc is what you need. It replicates flex remote object and has now
almost all functionality. Dictionary and Vector are the only types still
not supported. But you have even small messages and all functionality
tested in a BlazeDS project migration.

About "source" property: was a deprecated property in AMF0 (IIRC), so you
should not use it, and just use destination
using source was deprecated since you exposed in the client code the exact
backend source code class you're using, so making this a serious security
hole

code from our example in "examples/mxroyale"

http://localhost:8080/messagebroker/websocket-amf";
destination="exampleService"/>

HTH

Carlos


El mar., 2 abr. 2019 a las 13:44, spiros () escribió:

> Hi ,
>
> is there a way to use royale remote object to connect to coldfuison
> resources.
>
> I am not sure but I think there was a property "source" but I can't find
> anymore.
>
>
>
>
>
>fault="onFault(event)"
>
>  endPoint =
> "http://localhost:80/flex2gateway";
>
>  destination = "ColdFusion"
>
>  source = "any cf source"/>
>
>
>
>
>
> I user the last js version 9.6.0
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
> Spiros
>
>

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

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #634

[Apache Royale CI Server]

See 


--
[...truncated 2.03 MB...]
[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

[mxmlc] using source file: 

Jenkins build is back to normal : royale-typedefs #1210

[Apache Royale CI Server]

See 

Remote Object and Coldfusion

[spiros]

Hi , 

is there a way to use royale remote object to connect to coldfuison
resources. 

I am not sure but I think there was a property "source" but I can't find
anymore.

 

 

  http://localhost:80/flex2gateway";

 destination = "ColdFusion"

 source = "any cf source"/>

 

 

I user the last js version 9.6.0 

 

 

Thanks 

 

 

Spiros