date:20191009

Hey Richard,

When you were trying Royale - did you ask for help on dev list or in
private?

I agree that at the beginning earlier it was a problem to start. Now that
barrier is a bit lower. If you need any help you can ask here or in private
we are happy to help and get you move forward.

Thanks,
Piotr

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 7:10 AM Richard Hirstle  wrote:

> Well said Andrew - couldn’t agree more.
>
> I am a long time Flex developer (back to the beta) and have tried
> many times to get started with Royale, so that we can move all our existing
> apps over,  but have fallen at the first hurdle every time.
>
> We have now given up and are moving most over to Angular  - but still
> have high hopes for Royale.
>
> Richard
>
> --
> Richard Hirstle
> Sent with Airmail
>
> On 10 October 2019 at 8:10:44 am, Andrew Wetmore (cottag...@gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
> Instructions that require Ant or npm are not, in my humble opinion,
> entry-level instructions. I should not have to be an SDK constructor in
> order to use Royale to build the apps I want to build.
>
> The instructions need to be a TON clearer, and more obvious from the
> typical entry points where a new user would encounter Royale. We should
> possibly also add qualifiers to any statements that an IDE like Moonshine
> supports Royale. It does not support Royale as we deliver it, but only
> after it has been tweaked by processes that are obvious to those
> developing
> Royale but not to the world at large.
>
> Sorry if I sound irked, but consider that my reaction may mirror that of
> many who want to try Royale out but trip over the starting line.
>
> Andrew
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:52 PM Josh Tynjala 
> wrote:
>
> > The main royale-asjs README mentions the Adobe stuff as optional
> > dependencies, but the instructions seem to be aimed at contributors:
> >
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs#additional-prerequisites-for-swf-output
>
> >
> > What a non-contributor user is expected to do appears to be mentioned
> on
> > this page (it requires running the InstallAdobeSDKs.xml Ant script):
> >
> > https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/get-started/download-royale
> >
> > I recall that if you install the npm version of Royale, it will ask to
> > download the Adobe dependencies for you. That's probably the easiest
> way
> > for a new user to get started.
> >
> > --
> > Josh Tynjala
> > Bowler Hat LLC 
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:44 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks @Josh Tynjala  . Do we say that
> > > anywhere in the instructions where a new user would run into it?
> > >
> > >
> > > <
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>
> > Virus-free.
> > > www.avast.com
> > > <
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>
> > >
> > > <#m_-3106823410389824051_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:27 PM Josh Tynjala 
>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add
> the
> > >> Adobe
> > >> dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.
> > >>
> > >> The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from
> > >> Adobe.
> > >> It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's just
> a
> > >> copy of js.swc.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Josh Tynjala
> > >> Bowler Hat LLC 
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale
> > JS-SWF
> > >> > version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either
> JS
> > or
> > >> > Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
> > >> > playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc.
> > >> Download
> > >> > playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only
> > version,
> > >> > playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.
> > >> >
> > >> > <
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>
> > >> > >
> > >> > Virus-free.
> > >> > www.avast.com
> > >> > <
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>
> > >> > >
> > >> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:07 PM Alex Harui 
>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > When you build with AIR_HOME (which is required to create
> release
> > >> > > artifacts, since we want to produce both jsonly and js-swf in
> one
> > >> run), a
> > >> > > different

Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

Hey Andrew,

I recommend you make small workaround.
1) Take again JS only version of Royale 0.9.6
2) Open framework/royale-config.xml
3) Remove everything what is inside tag library-path
4) Try rebuild

Thanks,
Piotr

On Thu, Oct 10, 2019, 12:21 AM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:

> I recently had a hard drive crash, so I have a new hard drive without many
> past artifacts, a virgin system. I was using 0.9.4 in Moonshine before the
> crash without, as far as I know, any Ant or npm magic. Have things changed
> significantly between that release and this one?
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:40 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:
>
> > Instructions that require Ant or npm are not, in my humble opinion,
> > entry-level instructions. I should not have to be an SDK constructor in
> > order to use Royale to build the apps I want to build.
> >
> > The instructions need to be a TON clearer, and more obvious from the
> > typical entry points where a new user would encounter Royale. We should
> > possibly also add qualifiers to any statements that an IDE like Moonshine
> > supports Royale. It does not support Royale as we deliver it, but only
> > after it has been tweaked by processes that are obvious to those
> developing
> > Royale but not to the world at large.
> >
> > Sorry if I sound irked, but consider that my reaction may mirror that of
> > many who want to try Royale out but trip over the starting line.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
> Virus-free.
> > www.avast.com
> > <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> > <#m_-6424551647352680386_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:52 PM Josh Tynjala 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> The main royale-asjs README mentions the Adobe stuff as optional
> >> dependencies, but the instructions seem to be aimed at contributors:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs#additional-prerequisites-for-swf-output
> >>
> >> What a non-contributor user is expected to do appears to be mentioned on
> >> this page (it requires running the InstallAdobeSDKs.xml Ant script):
> >>
> >> https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/get-started/download-royale
> >>
> >> I recall that if you install the npm version of Royale, it will ask to
> >> download the Adobe dependencies for you. That's probably the easiest way
> >> for a new user to get started.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Josh Tynjala
> >> Bowler Hat LLC 
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:44 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Thanks @Josh Tynjala  . Do we say that
> >> > anywhere in the instructions where a new user would run into it?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > <
> >>
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> >> Virus-free.
> >> > www.avast.com
> >> > <
> >>
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >> >
> >> > <#m_-3106823410389824051_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:27 PM Josh Tynjala <
> joshtynj...@bowlerhat.dev>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add the
> >> >> Adobe
> >> >> dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.
> >> >>
> >> >> The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from
> >> >> Adobe.
> >> >> It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's
> just a
> >> >> copy of js.swc.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Josh Tynjala
> >> >> Bowler Hat LLC 
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale
> >> JS-SWF
> >> >> > version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either
> >> JS or
> >> >> > Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
> >> >> > playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc.
> >> >> Download
> >> >> > playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only
> >> version,
> >> >> > playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > <
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > Virus-free.
> >> >> > www.avast.com
> >> >> > <
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:07 PM Alex Harui  >
> >>

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

2019-10-09 Thread Richard Hirstle

Well said Andrew - couldn’t agree more.

I am a long time Flex developer (back to the beta) and have tried
many times to get started with Royale, so that we can move all our existing
apps over,  but have fallen at the first hurdle every time.

We have now given up and are moving most over to Angular  - but still
have high hopes for Royale.

Richard

-- 
Richard Hirstle
Sent with Airmail

On 10 October 2019 at 8:10:44 am, Andrew Wetmore (cottag...@gmail.com) wrote:

Instructions that require Ant or npm are not, in my humble opinion,  
entry-level instructions. I should not have to be an SDK constructor in  
order to use Royale to build the apps I want to build.  

The instructions need to be a TON clearer, and more obvious from the  
typical entry points where a new user would encounter Royale. We should  
possibly also add qualifiers to any statements that an IDE like Moonshine  
supports Royale. It does not support Royale as we deliver it, but only  
after it has been tweaked by processes that are obvious to those developing  
Royale but not to the world at large.  

Sorry if I sound irked, but consider that my reaction may mirror that of  
many who want to try Royale out but trip over the starting line.  

Andrew  


  
Virus-free.  
www.avast.com  

  
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>  

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:52 PM Josh Tynjala   
wrote:  

> The main royale-asjs README mentions the Adobe stuff as optional  
> dependencies, but the instructions seem to be aimed at contributors:  
>  
>  
> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs#additional-prerequisites-for-swf-output 
>  
>  
> What a non-contributor user is expected to do appears to be mentioned on  
> this page (it requires running the InstallAdobeSDKs.xml Ant script):  
>  
> https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/get-started/download-royale  
>  
> I recall that if you install the npm version of Royale, it will ask to  
> download the Adobe dependencies for you. That's probably the easiest way  
> for a new user to get started.  
>  
> --  
> Josh Tynjala  
> Bowler Hat LLC   
>  
>  
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:44 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:  
>  
> > Thanks @Josh Tynjala  . Do we say that  
> > anywhere in the instructions where a new user would run into it?  
> >  
> >  
> > <  
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>   
> Virus-free.  
> > www.avast.com  
> > <  
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>   
> >  
> > <#m_-3106823410389824051_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>  
> >  
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:27 PM Josh Tynjala   
> > wrote:  
> >  
> >> If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add the  
> >> Adobe  
> >> dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.  
> >>  
> >> The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from  
> >> Adobe.  
> >> It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's just a  
> >> copy of js.swc.  
> >>  
> >> --  
> >> Josh Tynjala  
> >> Bowler Hat LLC   
> >>  
> >>  
> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore   
> >> wrote:  
> >>  
> >> > I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale  
> JS-SWF  
> >> > version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either JS  
> or  
> >> > Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains  
> >> > playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc.  
> >> Download  
> >> > playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only  
> version,  
> >> > playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.  
> >> >  
> >> > <  
> >> >  
> >>  
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>   
> >> > >  
> >> > Virus-free.  
> >> > www.avast.com  
> >> > <  
> >> >  
> >>  
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>   
> >> > >  
> >> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>  
> >> >  
> >> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:07 PM Alex Harui   
> >> > wrote:  
> >> >  
> >> > > When you build with AIR_HOME (which is required to create release  
> >> > > artifacts, since we want to produce both jsonly and js-swf in one  
> >> run), a  
> >> > > different target called "jsonly-package" run and tries to muck with  
> >> some  
> >> > > files before packaging the js-only artifacts. It could be that the  
> >> > > jsonly-package needs updating now that SWF SWCs are listed in  
> >> > > royale-config.xml. That means we've had this bug for months and  
> >> nobody  
> >> > > noticed until now.  
> >> > >  
> >> > > -Alex  
> >> > >  
> >> > > On 10/9/19, 9:38 AM, "Josh Tynjala"   
>

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs #11

See 


Changes:


--
[...truncated 2.04 MB...]
 [java] ^
 [java] 
 [java] 
:
 col: 2 public var may not work in minified JS output.  Use getter/setter 
instead.
 [java] 
 [java] public static var excludedCount:int = 0;
 [java] ^
 [java] 
 [java] 
:
 col: 2 public var may not work in minified JS output.  Use getter/setter 
instead.
 [java] 
 [java] public var valueChanged:Boolean;
 [java] ^
 [java] 
 [java] 4.1698413 seconds
 [java] Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms384m -Xmx2g
 [java] Java Result: 2

compile-js:

main:

basictests-compile-java:
   [delete] Deleting directory 

[mkdir] Created dir: 

[javac] 
:1305:
 warning: 'includeantruntime' was not set, defaulting to 
build.sysclasspath=last; set to false for repeatable builds
[javac] Compiling 12 source files to 

[javac] Note: 

 uses or overrides a deprecated API.
[javac] Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details.

basictests:
[mxmlc] MXMLJSC
[mxmlc] 
-sdk-js-lib=
[mxmlc] +env.PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME=C:\adobe\flash
[mxmlc] -compiler.debug=true
[mxmlc] 
+royalelib=
[mxmlc] 
-closure-lib=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.library-path+=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.js-external-library-path=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.js-library-path=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.js-library-path+=
[mxmlc] --
[mxmlc] 

[mxmlc] Loading configuration: 

[mxmlc] Loading configuration: 

[mxmlc] 
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IFlexInfo
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ApplicationBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IEventDispatcher
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IInitialViewApplication
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IPopUpHost
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IPopUpHostParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRenderedObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStrand
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Application
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: BasicTestsApp
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DontSendScriptComplete
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ExitWhenDone
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SendFormattedResultsToLog
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RoyaleContext
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UnitTester
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ButtonTestScript
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CheckBoxTestScript
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HTMLElementWrapper
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IId
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IChild
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IUIBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ILayoutChild
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IParentIUIBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRoyaleElement
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStrandWithModel
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStrandWithModelView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStyleableObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UIBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IContainer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IContentViewHost
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides:

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs #10

See 


Changes:


--
[...truncated 2.04 MB...]
 [java] ^
 [java] 
 [java] 
:
 col: 2 public var may not work in minified JS output.  Use getter/setter 
instead.
 [java] 
 [java] public static var excludedCount:int = 0;
 [java] ^
 [java] 
 [java] 
:
 col: 2 public var may not work in minified JS output.  Use getter/setter 
instead.
 [java] 
 [java] public var valueChanged:Boolean;
 [java] ^
 [java] 
 [java] 4.4806976 seconds
 [java] Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms384m -Xmx2g
 [java] Java Result: 2

compile-js:

main:

basictests-compile-java:
   [delete] Deleting directory 

[mkdir] Created dir: 

[javac] 
:1305:
 warning: 'includeantruntime' was not set, defaulting to 
build.sysclasspath=last; set to false for repeatable builds
[javac] Compiling 12 source files to 

[javac] Note: 

 uses or overrides a deprecated API.
[javac] Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details.

basictests:
[mxmlc] MXMLJSC
[mxmlc] 
-sdk-js-lib=
[mxmlc] +env.PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME=C:\adobe\flash
[mxmlc] -compiler.debug=true
[mxmlc] 
+royalelib=
[mxmlc] 
-closure-lib=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.library-path+=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.js-external-library-path=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.js-library-path=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.js-library-path+=
[mxmlc] --
[mxmlc] 

[mxmlc] Loading configuration: 

[mxmlc] Loading configuration: 

[mxmlc] 
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IFlexInfo
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ApplicationBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IEventDispatcher
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IInitialViewApplication
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IPopUpHost
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IPopUpHostParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRenderedObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStrand
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Application
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: BasicTestsApp
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DontSendScriptComplete
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ExitWhenDone
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SendFormattedResultsToLog
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RoyaleContext
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UnitTester
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ButtonTestScript
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CheckBoxTestScript
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HTMLElementWrapper
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IId
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IChild
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IUIBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ILayoutChild
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IParentIUIBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRoyaleElement
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStrandWithModel
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStrandWithModelView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStyleableObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UIBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IContainer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IContentViewHost
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides:

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

You were probably using the JS-only version of 0.9.4. As I said, the
JS-only version does not require Ant or npm.

You're not missing any new requirements/dependencies that were added
between 0.9.4 and 0.9.6. *The JS-only version of 0.9.6 is simply broken.*
Something in the build went wrong, and we failed to discover it during the
release process. If I were to guess, it's probably because nightly builds
were always working correctly, and we didn't do enough manual testing of
the release candidate. Anyway, this is obviously a critical issue that we
need to get fixed ASAP.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 


On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:21 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:

> I recently had a hard drive crash, so I have a new hard drive without many
> past artifacts, a virgin system. I was using 0.9.4 in Moonshine before the
> crash without, as far as I know, any Ant or npm magic. Have things changed
> significantly between that release and this one?
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:40 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:
>
> > Instructions that require Ant or npm are not, in my humble opinion,
> > entry-level instructions. I should not have to be an SDK constructor in
> > order to use Royale to build the apps I want to build.
> >
> > The instructions need to be a TON clearer, and more obvious from the
> > typical entry points where a new user would encounter Royale. We should
> > possibly also add qualifiers to any statements that an IDE like Moonshine
> > supports Royale. It does not support Royale as we deliver it, but only
> > after it has been tweaked by processes that are obvious to those
> developing
> > Royale but not to the world at large.
> >
> > Sorry if I sound irked, but consider that my reaction may mirror that of
> > many who want to try Royale out but trip over the starting line.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> >
> > <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
> Virus-free.
> > www.avast.com
> > <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> > <#m_-6424551647352680386_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:52 PM Josh Tynjala 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> The main royale-asjs README mentions the Adobe stuff as optional
> >> dependencies, but the instructions seem to be aimed at contributors:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs#additional-prerequisites-for-swf-output
> >>
> >> What a non-contributor user is expected to do appears to be mentioned on
> >> this page (it requires running the InstallAdobeSDKs.xml Ant script):
> >>
> >> https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/get-started/download-royale
> >>
> >> I recall that if you install the npm version of Royale, it will ask to
> >> download the Adobe dependencies for you. That's probably the easiest way
> >> for a new user to get started.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Josh Tynjala
> >> Bowler Hat LLC 
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:44 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Thanks @Josh Tynjala  . Do we say that
> >> > anywhere in the instructions where a new user would run into it?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > <
> >>
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> >> Virus-free.
> >> > www.avast.com
> >> > <
> >>
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >> >
> >> > <#m_-3106823410389824051_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:27 PM Josh Tynjala <
> joshtynj...@bowlerhat.dev>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add the
> >> >> Adobe
> >> >> dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.
> >> >>
> >> >> The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from
> >> >> Adobe.
> >> >> It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's
> just a
> >> >> copy of js.swc.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Josh Tynjala
> >> >> Bowler Hat LLC 
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale
> >> JS-SWF
> >> >> > version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either
> >> JS or
> >> >> > Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
> >> >> > playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc.
> >> >> Download
> >> >> > playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only
> >> version,
> >> >> > playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > <
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >>
>

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

I recently had a hard drive crash, so I have a new hard drive without many
past artifacts, a virgin system. I was using 0.9.4 in Moonshine before the
crash without, as far as I know, any Ant or npm magic. Have things changed
significantly between that release and this one?


Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:40 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:

> Instructions that require Ant or npm are not, in my humble opinion,
> entry-level instructions. I should not have to be an SDK constructor in
> order to use Royale to build the apps I want to build.
>
> The instructions need to be a TON clearer, and more obvious from the
> typical entry points where a new user would encounter Royale. We should
> possibly also add qualifiers to any statements that an IDE like Moonshine
> supports Royale. It does not support Royale as we deliver it, but only
> after it has been tweaked by processes that are obvious to those developing
> Royale but not to the world at large.
>
> Sorry if I sound irked, but consider that my reaction may mirror that of
> many who want to try Royale out but trip over the starting line.
>
> Andrew
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> 
> <#m_-6424551647352680386_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:52 PM Josh Tynjala 
> wrote:
>
>> The main royale-asjs README mentions the Adobe stuff as optional
>> dependencies, but the instructions seem to be aimed at contributors:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs#additional-prerequisites-for-swf-output
>>
>> What a non-contributor user is expected to do appears to be mentioned on
>> this page (it requires running the InstallAdobeSDKs.xml Ant script):
>>
>> https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/get-started/download-royale
>>
>> I recall that if you install the npm version of Royale, it will ask to
>> download the Adobe dependencies for you. That's probably the easiest way
>> for a new user to get started.
>>
>> --
>> Josh Tynjala
>> Bowler Hat LLC 
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:44 PM Andrew Wetmore 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Thanks @Josh Tynjala  . Do we say that
>> > anywhere in the instructions where a new user would run into it?
>> >
>> >
>> > <
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>> Virus-free.
>> > www.avast.com
>> > <
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>> >
>> > <#m_-3106823410389824051_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:27 PM Josh Tynjala 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add the
>> >> Adobe
>> >> dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.
>> >>
>> >> The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from
>> >> Adobe.
>> >> It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's just a
>> >> copy of js.swc.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Josh Tynjala
>> >> Bowler Hat LLC 
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore 
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale
>> JS-SWF
>> >> > version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either
>> JS or
>> >> > Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
>> >> > playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc.
>> >> Download
>> >> > playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only
>> version,
>> >> > playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.
>> >> >
>> >> > <
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>> >> > >
>> >> > Virus-free.
>> >> > www.avast.com
>> >> > <
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>> >> > >
>> >> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>> >> >
>> >> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:07 PM Alex Harui 
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > When you build with AIR_HOME (which is required to create release
>> >> > > artifacts, since we want to produce both jsonly and js-swf in one
>> >> run), a
>> >> > > different target called "jsonly-package" run and tries to muck with
>> >> some
>> >> > > files before packaging the js-only artifacts.  It could be that the
>> >> > > jsonly-package needs updating now that SWF SWCs are listed in
>> >> > > royale-config.xml.  That means we've had this bug for months and
>> >> nobody
>> >> > > noticed until now.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > -Alex
>> >> > >
>>

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

That would be fine. I am stuck, evidently, at something in the 0.9.6
release of the JS-only version being broken.


Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 7:09 PM Josh Tynjala 
wrote:

> Node/npm is pretty normal prerequisite for most JS development these days,
> but I understand your point.
>
> Ideally, we should be encouraging developers to start with the JS-only
> version, which doesn't require any of those special dependencies (other
> than Java, which is necessary to run the compiler).
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC 
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 2:41 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:
>
> > Instructions that require Ant or npm are not, in my humble opinion,
> > entry-level instructions. I should not have to be an SDK constructor in
> > order to use Royale to build the apps I want to build.
> >
> > The instructions need to be a TON clearer, and more obvious from the
> > typical entry points where a new user would encounter Royale. We should
> > possibly also add qualifiers to any statements that an IDE like Moonshine
> > supports Royale. It does not support Royale as we deliver it, but only
> > after it has been tweaked by processes that are obvious to those
> developing
> > Royale but not to the world at large.
> >
> > Sorry if I sound irked, but consider that my reaction may mirror that of
> > many who want to try Royale out but trip over the starting line.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > <
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > >
> > Virus-free.
> > www.avast.com
> > <
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > >
> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:52 PM Josh Tynjala 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The main royale-asjs README mentions the Adobe stuff as optional
> > > dependencies, but the instructions seem to be aimed at contributors:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs#additional-prerequisites-for-swf-output
> > >
> > > What a non-contributor user is expected to do appears to be mentioned
> on
> > > this page (it requires running the InstallAdobeSDKs.xml Ant script):
> > >
> > > https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/get-started/download-royale
> > >
> > > I recall that if you install the npm version of Royale, it will ask to
> > > download the Adobe dependencies for you. That's probably the easiest
> way
> > > for a new user to get started.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Josh Tynjala
> > > Bowler Hat LLC 
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:44 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks @Josh Tynjala  . Do we say that
> > > > anywhere in the instructions where a new user would run into it?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > >
> > > Virus-free.
> > > > www.avast.com
> > > > <
> > >
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > > >
> > > > <#m_-3106823410389824051_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:27 PM Josh Tynjala <
> joshtynj...@bowlerhat.dev
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add
> the
> > > >> Adobe
> > > >> dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.
> > > >>
> > > >> The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from
> > > >> Adobe.
> > > >> It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's
> just
> > a
> > > >> copy of js.swc.
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> Josh Tynjala
> > > >> Bowler Hat LLC 
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale
> > > JS-SWF
> > > >> > version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either
> > JS
> > > or
> > > >> > Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
> > > >> > playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc.
> > > >> Download
> > > >> > playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only
> > > version,
> > > >> > playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > <
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > Virus-free.
> > > >> > www.avast.com
> > > >> > <
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

Node/npm is pretty normal prerequisite for most JS development these days,
but I understand your point.

Ideally, we should be encouraging developers to start with the JS-only
version, which doesn't require any of those special dependencies (other
than Java, which is necessary to run the compiler).

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 


On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 2:41 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:

> Instructions that require Ant or npm are not, in my humble opinion,
> entry-level instructions. I should not have to be an SDK constructor in
> order to use Royale to build the apps I want to build.
>
> The instructions need to be a TON clearer, and more obvious from the
> typical entry points where a new user would encounter Royale. We should
> possibly also add qualifiers to any statements that an IDE like Moonshine
> supports Royale. It does not support Royale as we deliver it, but only
> after it has been tweaked by processes that are obvious to those developing
> Royale but not to the world at large.
>
> Sorry if I sound irked, but consider that my reaction may mirror that of
> many who want to try Royale out but trip over the starting line.
>
> Andrew
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:52 PM Josh Tynjala 
> wrote:
>
> > The main royale-asjs README mentions the Adobe stuff as optional
> > dependencies, but the instructions seem to be aimed at contributors:
> >
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs#additional-prerequisites-for-swf-output
> >
> > What a non-contributor user is expected to do appears to be mentioned on
> > this page (it requires running the InstallAdobeSDKs.xml Ant script):
> >
> > https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/get-started/download-royale
> >
> > I recall that if you install the npm version of Royale, it will ask to
> > download the Adobe dependencies for you. That's probably the easiest way
> > for a new user to get started.
> >
> > --
> > Josh Tynjala
> > Bowler Hat LLC 
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:44 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks @Josh Tynjala  . Do we say that
> > > anywhere in the instructions where a new user would run into it?
> > >
> > >
> > > <
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> > Virus-free.
> > > www.avast.com
> > > <
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > >
> > > <#m_-3106823410389824051_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:27 PM Josh Tynjala  >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add the
> > >> Adobe
> > >> dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.
> > >>
> > >> The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from
> > >> Adobe.
> > >> It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's just
> a
> > >> copy of js.swc.
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Josh Tynjala
> > >> Bowler Hat LLC 
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale
> > JS-SWF
> > >> > version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either
> JS
> > or
> > >> > Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
> > >> > playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc.
> > >> Download
> > >> > playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only
> > version,
> > >> > playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.
> > >> >
> > >> > <
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > >> > >
> > >> > Virus-free.
> > >> > www.avast.com
> > >> > <
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > >> > >
> > >> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:07 PM Alex Harui  >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > When you build with AIR_HOME (which is required to create release
> > >> > > artifacts, since we want to produce both jsonly and js-swf in one
> > >> run), a
> > >> > > different target called "jsonly-package" run and tries to muck
> with
> > >> some
> > >> > > files before packaging the js-only artifacts.  It could be that
> the
> > >> > > jsonly-package needs updating now that SWF SWCs are listed in
> > >> > > royale-config.xml.  That means we've had this bug for months and
> > >> nobody
> > >> > > noticed until now.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -Alex
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On 10/9/19, 9:38 AM, "Josh Tynjala" 
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > >
> >

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

The main royale-asjs README mentions the Adobe stuff as optional
dependencies, but the instructions seem to be aimed at contributors:

https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs#additional-prerequisites-for-swf-output

What a non-contributor user is expected to do appears to be mentioned on
this page (it requires running the InstallAdobeSDKs.xml Ant script):

https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/get-started/download-royale

I recall that if you install the npm version of Royale, it will ask to
download the Adobe dependencies for you. That's probably the easiest way
for a new user to get started.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 


On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:44 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:

> Thanks @Josh Tynjala  . Do we say that
> anywhere in the instructions where a new user would run into it?
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> 
> <#m_-3106823410389824051_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:27 PM Josh Tynjala 
> wrote:
>
>> If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add the
>> Adobe
>> dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.
>>
>> The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from
>> Adobe.
>> It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's just a
>> copy of js.swc.
>>
>> --
>> Josh Tynjala
>> Bowler Hat LLC 
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale JS-SWF
>> > version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either JS or
>> > Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
>> > playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc.
>> Download
>> > playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only version,
>> > playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.
>> >
>> > <
>> >
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>> > >
>> > Virus-free.
>> > www.avast.com
>> > <
>> >
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
>> > >
>> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:07 PM Alex Harui 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > When you build with AIR_HOME (which is required to create release
>> > > artifacts, since we want to produce both jsonly and js-swf in one
>> run), a
>> > > different target called "jsonly-package" run and tries to muck with
>> some
>> > > files before packaging the js-only artifacts.  It could be that the
>> > > jsonly-package needs updating now that SWF SWCs are listed in
>> > > royale-config.xml.  That means we've had this bug for months and
>> nobody
>> > > noticed until now.
>> > >
>> > > -Alex
>> > >
>> > > On 10/9/19, 9:38 AM, "Josh Tynjala" 
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > It looks like the Ant target that updates the library-path for the
>> > > JS-only
>> > > build is called tweak-for-jsonly. Copied here for convenience:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2Fasn0idata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=7h3ZHxgGsfZqP8kE22amKQYDr7%2BNyQa7EpoG86147uU%3Dreserved=0
>> > >
>> > > I see that it has unless="env.AIR_HOME", which means that this
>> target
>> > > is
>> > > skipped if the AIR_HOME environment variable is set. With that in
>> > > mind, I'm
>> > > guessing that AIR_HOME needs to be set for the js-swf build, but
>> > > cleared
>> > > for the js-only build.
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Josh Tynjala
>> > > Bowler Hat LLC <
>> > >
>> >
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbowlerhat.devdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=Ih2P7zf2c%2BLPn5ktks02EE7k6s24RKcabVem7VqjWeg%3Dreserved=0
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:52 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
>> > > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi Guys,
>> > > >
>> > > > It looks like we have broken royale-config in released SDK.
>> Andrew
>> > > raised
>> > > > in Moonshine GitHub issue that he couldn't build Hello World
>> > > project. I
>> > > > tried Moonshine and downloaded JS-only version of SDK. I get
>> > > following
>> > > > error [1].
>> > > > I downloaded JS-SWF version and tried compile project again -
>> this
>> > > time it
>> > > > went fine.
>> > > >
>> > > > JS-only version of released 0.9.6 contains in section
>> > >  -
>> > > > list of swc. - Those swc doesn't exists in JS-only.
>> > > >
>> > >

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

Thanks @Josh Tynjala  . Do we say that anywhere
in the instructions where a new user would run into it?


Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 5:27 PM Josh Tynjala 
wrote:

> If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add the Adobe
> dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.
>
> The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from Adobe.
> It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's just a
> copy of js.swc.
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC 
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:
>
> > I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale JS-SWF
> > version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either JS or
> > Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
> > playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc.
> Download
> > playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only version,
> > playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.
> >
> > <
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > >
> > Virus-free.
> > www.avast.com
> > <
> >
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> > >
> > <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:07 PM Alex Harui 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > When you build with AIR_HOME (which is required to create release
> > > artifacts, since we want to produce both jsonly and js-swf in one
> run), a
> > > different target called "jsonly-package" run and tries to muck with
> some
> > > files before packaging the js-only artifacts.  It could be that the
> > > jsonly-package needs updating now that SWF SWCs are listed in
> > > royale-config.xml.  That means we've had this bug for months and nobody
> > > noticed until now.
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 10/9/19, 9:38 AM, "Josh Tynjala" 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > It looks like the Ant target that updates the library-path for the
> > > JS-only
> > > build is called tweak-for-jsonly. Copied here for convenience:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2Fasn0idata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=7h3ZHxgGsfZqP8kE22amKQYDr7%2BNyQa7EpoG86147uU%3Dreserved=0
> > >
> > > I see that it has unless="env.AIR_HOME", which means that this
> target
> > > is
> > > skipped if the AIR_HOME environment variable is set. With that in
> > > mind, I'm
> > > guessing that AIR_HOME needs to be set for the js-swf build, but
> > > cleared
> > > for the js-only build.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Josh Tynjala
> > > Bowler Hat LLC <
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbowlerhat.devdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=Ih2P7zf2c%2BLPn5ktks02EE7k6s24RKcabVem7VqjWeg%3Dreserved=0
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:52 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> > > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Guys,
> > > >
> > > > It looks like we have broken royale-config in released SDK.
> Andrew
> > > raised
> > > > in Moonshine GitHub issue that he couldn't build Hello World
> > > project. I
> > > > tried Moonshine and downloaded JS-only version of SDK. I get
> > > following
> > > > error [1].
> > > > I downloaded JS-SWF version and tried compile project again -
> this
> > > time it
> > > > went fine.
> > > >
> > > > JS-only version of released 0.9.6 contains in section
> > >  -
> > > > list of swc. - Those swc doesn't exists in JS-only.
> > > >
> > > > Fragment of config
> > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > >  libs/Basic.swc
> > > > >  libs/Binding.swc
> > > > >  libs/Charts.swc
> > > > >  libs/Collections.swc
> > > > >  libs/Core.swc
> > > > > 
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > JS-only nightly build of 0.9.7 - doesn't contains in that section
> > > anything
> > > >
> > > > >   
> > > > >   
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2F2lgvkdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=IebVohnQGkmg%2BAO2RJCS2LRTdP3LQE0NoQ%2BUt7xlOJI%3Dreserved=0
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > >

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

If you downloaded the js-swf binary distribution, you need to add the Adobe
dependencies manually. We cannot distribute them.

The playerglobal.swc in the js-only version is not the real one from Adobe.
It's just a placeholder to make certain IDEs happy. I think it's just a
copy of js.swc.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 


On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:16 PM Andrew Wetmore  wrote:

> I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale JS-SWF
> version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either JS or
> Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
> playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc. Download
> playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only version,
> playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.
>
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <
> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail
> >
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:07 PM Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
> > When you build with AIR_HOME (which is required to create release
> > artifacts, since we want to produce both jsonly and js-swf in one run), a
> > different target called "jsonly-package" run and tries to muck with some
> > files before packaging the js-only artifacts.  It could be that the
> > jsonly-package needs updating now that SWF SWCs are listed in
> > royale-config.xml.  That means we've had this bug for months and nobody
> > noticed until now.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 10/9/19, 9:38 AM, "Josh Tynjala"  wrote:
> >
> > It looks like the Ant target that updates the library-path for the
> > JS-only
> > build is called tweak-for-jsonly. Copied here for convenience:
> >
> >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2Fasn0idata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=7h3ZHxgGsfZqP8kE22amKQYDr7%2BNyQa7EpoG86147uU%3Dreserved=0
> >
> > I see that it has unless="env.AIR_HOME", which means that this target
> > is
> > skipped if the AIR_HOME environment variable is set. With that in
> > mind, I'm
> > guessing that AIR_HOME needs to be set for the js-swf build, but
> > cleared
> > for the js-only build.
> >
> > --
> > Josh Tynjala
> > Bowler Hat LLC <
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbowlerhat.devdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=Ih2P7zf2c%2BLPn5ktks02EE7k6s24RKcabVem7VqjWeg%3Dreserved=0
> > >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:52 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Guys,
> > >
> > > It looks like we have broken royale-config in released SDK. Andrew
> > raised
> > > in Moonshine GitHub issue that he couldn't build Hello World
> > project. I
> > > tried Moonshine and downloaded JS-only version of SDK. I get
> > following
> > > error [1].
> > > I downloaded JS-SWF version and tried compile project again - this
> > time it
> > > went fine.
> > >
> > > JS-only version of released 0.9.6 contains in section
> >  -
> > > list of swc. - Those swc doesn't exists in JS-only.
> > >
> > > Fragment of config
> > >
> > > > 
> > > >  libs/Basic.swc
> > > >  libs/Binding.swc
> > > >  libs/Charts.swc
> > > >  libs/Collections.swc
> > > >  libs/Core.swc
> > > > 
> > >
> > >
> > > JS-only nightly build of 0.9.7 - doesn't contains in that section
> > anything
> > >
> > > >   
> > > >   
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2F2lgvkdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=IebVohnQGkmg%2BAO2RJCS2LRTdP3LQE0NoQ%2BUt7xlOJI%3Dreserved=0
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > --
> > >
> > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > >
> > > Patreon: *
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzyckidata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=BmbfQaY1AjgUQk61TOlDZqRi1jWSJWDFaxgzaFiw1c4%3Dreserved=0
> > > <
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzyckidata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=BmbfQaY1AjgUQk61TOlDZqRi1jWSJWDFaxgzaFiw1c4%3Dreserved=0
> > >*
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Andrew

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

I wiped out the previous project and tried again with the Royale JS-SWF
version. When I try to compile the project in Moonshine for either JS or
Flash, I see this error message: "This SDK does not contains
playerglobal.swc in frameworks\libs\player\11.7\playerglobal.swc. Download
playerglobal here". When I look in the package for the JS-only version,
playerglobal is there. I do not see it in the JS_SWF version.


Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 3:07 PM Alex Harui  wrote:

> When you build with AIR_HOME (which is required to create release
> artifacts, since we want to produce both jsonly and js-swf in one run), a
> different target called "jsonly-package" run and tries to muck with some
> files before packaging the js-only artifacts.  It could be that the
> jsonly-package needs updating now that SWF SWCs are listed in
> royale-config.xml.  That means we've had this bug for months and nobody
> noticed until now.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 10/9/19, 9:38 AM, "Josh Tynjala"  wrote:
>
> It looks like the Ant target that updates the library-path for the
> JS-only
> build is called tweak-for-jsonly. Copied here for convenience:
>
>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2Fasn0idata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=7h3ZHxgGsfZqP8kE22amKQYDr7%2BNyQa7EpoG86147uU%3Dreserved=0
>
> I see that it has unless="env.AIR_HOME", which means that this target
> is
> skipped if the AIR_HOME environment variable is set. With that in
> mind, I'm
> guessing that AIR_HOME needs to be set for the js-swf build, but
> cleared
> for the js-only build.
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC <
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbowlerhat.devdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=Ih2P7zf2c%2BLPn5ktks02EE7k6s24RKcabVem7VqjWeg%3Dreserved=0
> >
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:52 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Guys,
> >
> > It looks like we have broken royale-config in released SDK. Andrew
> raised
> > in Moonshine GitHub issue that he couldn't build Hello World
> project. I
> > tried Moonshine and downloaded JS-only version of SDK. I get
> following
> > error [1].
> > I downloaded JS-SWF version and tried compile project again - this
> time it
> > went fine.
> >
> > JS-only version of released 0.9.6 contains in section
>  -
> > list of swc. - Those swc doesn't exists in JS-only.
> >
> > Fragment of config
> >
> > > 
> > >  libs/Basic.swc
> > >  libs/Binding.swc
> > >  libs/Charts.swc
> > >  libs/Collections.swc
> > >  libs/Core.swc
> > > 
> >
> >
> > JS-only nightly build of 0.9.7 - doesn't contains in that section
> anything
> >
> > >   
> > >   
> >
> >
> > [1]
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2F2lgvkdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=IebVohnQGkmg%2BAO2RJCS2LRTdP3LQE0NoQ%2BUt7xlOJI%3Dreserved=0
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --
> >
> > Piotr Zarzycki
> >
> > Patreon: *
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzyckidata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=BmbfQaY1AjgUQk61TOlDZqRi1jWSJWDFaxgzaFiw1c4%3Dreserved=0
> > <
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzyckidata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=BmbfQaY1AjgUQk61TOlDZqRi1jWSJWDFaxgzaFiw1c4%3Dreserved=0
> >*
> >
>
>
>

-- 
Andrew Wetmore

http://cottage14.blogspot.com/






Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Re: RoyaleUnit testing - swf player version used for testing

Yeah, I think it would make a lot of sense to update our build scripts to
use this environment variable when launching RoyaleUnit tests. I'm pretty
sure that it is already set on the CI server for Mustella tests, so we
should have the build consistently use the same version for everything.

As a bonus, setting the default program for .swf files won't be necessary
anymore.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 


On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 11:46 AM Greg Dove  wrote:

> Thanks Josh, that definitely sounds like a better option.  I will give that
> a try for that side of things locally.
> Maybe we can also use this on the CI server to specify the version that is
> used?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 7:30 AM Josh Tynjala 
> wrote:
>
> > The RoyaleUnit Ant task has a "command" parameter where we can pass in
> the
> > path of a specific executable. I don't think the Ant task should try to
> > read a magic environment variable. Instead, we can reference the
> > environment variable inside the Ant script.
> >
> > Something like this should probably work:
> >
> > 
> >
> > --
> > Josh Tynjala
> > Bowler Hat LLC 
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 11:09 AM Greg Dove  wrote:
> >
> > > This is partly for general input, but also for Josh specifically in
> > > relation to RoyaleUnit
> > >
> > > Background
> > > I am continuing to add unit tests, mostly language level stuff.
> > >
> > > It is rare, but there can be some things to account for in terms of
> > > differences caused by the player being used for testing (and also
> > sometimes
> > > for swf versions).
> > > This has come up with some XML related stuff recently, where there was
> a
> > > one test that failed in the CI build. I discovered this was happening
> in
> > > standalone player (probably regular player and air too) only in
> versions
> > > between 11.2 and 20.0 - it passes in version 11.1 and versions 21.0+ .
> I
> > > only tested this on windows, so it may not be apparent on mac.  It
> wasn't
> > > failing for me locally because my system player was version 30.
> > >
> > > RoyaleUnit testing uses the system file ('.swf') association to launch
> > the
> > > player. So for some tests it means that they could pass or not
> depending
> > on
> > > the version of the standalone player being launched, because bugs were
> > > fixed in later versions of the player /AVM.
> > >
> > > I have my local FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER pointing to a 22 version. I know
> > that
> > > version is used in some of the build configs as well, but it seems that
> > the
> > > player version for testing on the CI server was something between 11.2
> > and
> > > 20 so that firstly seems inconsistent with version 22 used elsewhere.
> > >
> > > So two topics really:
> > >
> > > 1. General request: Could we agree to standardize the version of the
> > flash
> > > player we use for RoyaleUnit testing for CI builds? And what version
> > should
> > > that be. I don't really mind what that is although I think more recent
> > > versions make sense mainly because I think we should be aiming to
> emulate
> > > the most up to date version of the player behavior with various bug
> > fixes.
> > > However mostly I just would like to be aware of it so I can match it
> > > locally.
> > >
> > > 2. For Josh, a request:
> > > Could we have RoyaleUnit configurable for the player that should be
> used
> > > for testing (with the system player as fallback)?
> > > I was able to do this quickly locally in WindowsDefaults.java by doing
> > the
> > > following:
> > >
> > > public String getOpenCommand()
> > > {
> > > if (System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER") != null) {
> > > return System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER");
> > > }
> > > return "rundll32";
> > > }
> > >
> > > public String[] getOpenSystemArguments()
> > > {
> > > if (System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER") != null) {
> > > return new String[]{""};
> > > }
> > > return new String[]{"url.dll,FileProtocolHandler"};
> > > }
> > >
> > > I am not sure if it should be using the same ' FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER'
> env
> > > var  there that we use elsewhere or not... but I was able to use that
> > > approach to quickly cycle through a lot of different player versions
> with
> > > the tests to find the versions that had the issue.
> > > If it needs to be different it could be something that is specific to
> > > RoyaleUnit... ROYALEUNIT_SWF_PLAYER or anything really. I don't know if
> > > this approach works the same on mac... anyhow please consider that
> > > (generally) as a possible addition for Royaleunit.
> > >
> >
>

Re: RoyaleUnit testing - swf player version used for testing

2019-10-09 Thread Greg Dove

Thanks Josh, that definitely sounds like a better option.  I will give that
a try for that side of things locally.
Maybe we can also use this on the CI server to specify the version that is
used?



On Thu, Oct 10, 2019 at 7:30 AM Josh Tynjala 
wrote:

> The RoyaleUnit Ant task has a "command" parameter where we can pass in the
> path of a specific executable. I don't think the Ant task should try to
> read a magic environment variable. Instead, we can reference the
> environment variable inside the Ant script.
>
> Something like this should probably work:
>
> 
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC 
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 11:09 AM Greg Dove  wrote:
>
> > This is partly for general input, but also for Josh specifically in
> > relation to RoyaleUnit
> >
> > Background
> > I am continuing to add unit tests, mostly language level stuff.
> >
> > It is rare, but there can be some things to account for in terms of
> > differences caused by the player being used for testing (and also
> sometimes
> > for swf versions).
> > This has come up with some XML related stuff recently, where there was a
> > one test that failed in the CI build. I discovered this was happening in
> > standalone player (probably regular player and air too) only in versions
> > between 11.2 and 20.0 - it passes in version 11.1 and versions 21.0+ . I
> > only tested this on windows, so it may not be apparent on mac.  It wasn't
> > failing for me locally because my system player was version 30.
> >
> > RoyaleUnit testing uses the system file ('.swf') association to launch
> the
> > player. So for some tests it means that they could pass or not depending
> on
> > the version of the standalone player being launched, because bugs were
> > fixed in later versions of the player /AVM.
> >
> > I have my local FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER pointing to a 22 version. I know
> that
> > version is used in some of the build configs as well, but it seems that
> the
> > player version for testing on the CI server was something between 11.2
> and
> > 20 so that firstly seems inconsistent with version 22 used elsewhere.
> >
> > So two topics really:
> >
> > 1. General request: Could we agree to standardize the version of the
> flash
> > player we use for RoyaleUnit testing for CI builds? And what version
> should
> > that be. I don't really mind what that is although I think more recent
> > versions make sense mainly because I think we should be aiming to emulate
> > the most up to date version of the player behavior with various bug
> fixes.
> > However mostly I just would like to be aware of it so I can match it
> > locally.
> >
> > 2. For Josh, a request:
> > Could we have RoyaleUnit configurable for the player that should be used
> > for testing (with the system player as fallback)?
> > I was able to do this quickly locally in WindowsDefaults.java by doing
> the
> > following:
> >
> > public String getOpenCommand()
> > {
> > if (System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER") != null) {
> > return System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER");
> > }
> > return "rundll32";
> > }
> >
> > public String[] getOpenSystemArguments()
> > {
> > if (System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER") != null) {
> > return new String[]{""};
> > }
> > return new String[]{"url.dll,FileProtocolHandler"};
> > }
> >
> > I am not sure if it should be using the same ' FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER' env
> > var  there that we use elsewhere or not... but I was able to use that
> > approach to quickly cycle through a lot of different player versions with
> > the tests to find the versions that had the issue.
> > If it needs to be different it could be something that is specific to
> > RoyaleUnit... ROYALEUNIT_SWF_PLAYER or anything really. I don't know if
> > this approach works the same on mac... anyhow please consider that
> > (generally) as a possible addition for Royaleunit.
> >
>

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs #9

See 


Changes:


--
[...truncated 2.04 MB...]
 [java] ^
 [java] 
 [java] 
:
 col: 2 public var may not work in minified JS output.  Use getter/setter 
instead.
 [java] 
 [java] public static var excludedCount:int = 0;
 [java] ^
 [java] 
 [java] 
:
 col: 2 public var may not work in minified JS output.  Use getter/setter 
instead.
 [java] 
 [java] public var valueChanged:Boolean;
 [java] ^
 [java] 
 [java] 4.2592445 seconds
 [java] Picked up JAVA_TOOL_OPTIONS: -Dfile.encoding=UTF-8 -Xms384m -Xmx2g
 [java] Java Result: 2

compile-js:

main:

basictests-compile-java:
[mkdir] Created dir: 

[javac] 
:1305:
 warning: 'includeantruntime' was not set, defaulting to 
build.sysclasspath=last; set to false for repeatable builds
[javac] Compiling 12 source files to 

[javac] Note: 

 uses or overrides a deprecated API.
[javac] Note: Recompile with -Xlint:deprecation for details.

basictests:
[mxmlc] MXMLJSC
[mxmlc] 
-sdk-js-lib=
[mxmlc] +env.PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME=C:\adobe\flash
[mxmlc] -compiler.debug=true
[mxmlc] 
+royalelib=
[mxmlc] 
-closure-lib=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.library-path+=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.js-external-library-path=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.js-library-path=
[mxmlc] 
-compiler.js-library-path+=
[mxmlc] --
[mxmlc] 

[mxmlc] Loading configuration: 

[mxmlc] Loading configuration: 

[mxmlc] 
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IFlexInfo
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ApplicationBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IEventDispatcher
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IInitialViewApplication
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IPopUpHost
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IPopUpHostParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRenderedObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStrand
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Application
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: BasicTestsApp
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DontSendScriptComplete
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ExitWhenDone
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SendFormattedResultsToLog
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RoyaleContext
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UnitTester
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ButtonTestScript
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CheckBoxTestScript
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HTMLElementWrapper
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IId
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IChild
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IUIBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ILayoutChild
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IParentIUIBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRoyaleElement
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStrandWithModel
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStrandWithModelView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStyleableObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UIBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IContainer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IContentViewHost
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ILayoutParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ILayoutView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStatesObject
[mxmlc] scanning for

Re: RoyaleUnit testing - swf player version used for testing

The RoyaleUnit Ant task has a "command" parameter where we can pass in the
path of a specific executable. I don't think the Ant task should try to
read a magic environment variable. Instead, we can reference the
environment variable inside the Ant script.

Something like this should probably work:



--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 


On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 11:09 AM Greg Dove  wrote:

> This is partly for general input, but also for Josh specifically in
> relation to RoyaleUnit
>
> Background
> I am continuing to add unit tests, mostly language level stuff.
>
> It is rare, but there can be some things to account for in terms of
> differences caused by the player being used for testing (and also sometimes
> for swf versions).
> This has come up with some XML related stuff recently, where there was a
> one test that failed in the CI build. I discovered this was happening in
> standalone player (probably regular player and air too) only in versions
> between 11.2 and 20.0 - it passes in version 11.1 and versions 21.0+ . I
> only tested this on windows, so it may not be apparent on mac.  It wasn't
> failing for me locally because my system player was version 30.
>
> RoyaleUnit testing uses the system file ('.swf') association to launch the
> player. So for some tests it means that they could pass or not depending on
> the version of the standalone player being launched, because bugs were
> fixed in later versions of the player /AVM.
>
> I have my local FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER pointing to a 22 version. I know that
> version is used in some of the build configs as well, but it seems that the
> player version for testing on the CI server was something between 11.2 and
> 20 so that firstly seems inconsistent with version 22 used elsewhere.
>
> So two topics really:
>
> 1. General request: Could we agree to standardize the version of the flash
> player we use for RoyaleUnit testing for CI builds? And what version should
> that be. I don't really mind what that is although I think more recent
> versions make sense mainly because I think we should be aiming to emulate
> the most up to date version of the player behavior with various bug fixes.
> However mostly I just would like to be aware of it so I can match it
> locally.
>
> 2. For Josh, a request:
> Could we have RoyaleUnit configurable for the player that should be used
> for testing (with the system player as fallback)?
> I was able to do this quickly locally in WindowsDefaults.java by doing the
> following:
>
> public String getOpenCommand()
> {
> if (System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER") != null) {
> return System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER");
> }
> return "rundll32";
> }
>
> public String[] getOpenSystemArguments()
> {
> if (System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER") != null) {
> return new String[]{""};
> }
> return new String[]{"url.dll,FileProtocolHandler"};
> }
>
> I am not sure if it should be using the same ' FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER' env
> var  there that we use elsewhere or not... but I was able to use that
> approach to quickly cycle through a lot of different player versions with
> the tests to find the versions that had the issue.
> If it needs to be different it could be something that is specific to
> RoyaleUnit... ROYALEUNIT_SWF_PLAYER or anything really. I don't know if
> this approach works the same on mac... anyhow please consider that
> (generally) as a possible addition for Royaleunit.
>

RoyaleUnit testing - swf player version used for testing

2019-10-09 Thread Greg Dove

This is partly for general input, but also for Josh specifically in
relation to RoyaleUnit

Background
I am continuing to add unit tests, mostly language level stuff.

It is rare, but there can be some things to account for in terms of
differences caused by the player being used for testing (and also sometimes
for swf versions).
This has come up with some XML related stuff recently, where there was a
one test that failed in the CI build. I discovered this was happening in
standalone player (probably regular player and air too) only in versions
between 11.2 and 20.0 - it passes in version 11.1 and versions 21.0+ . I
only tested this on windows, so it may not be apparent on mac.  It wasn't
failing for me locally because my system player was version 30.

RoyaleUnit testing uses the system file ('.swf') association to launch the
player. So for some tests it means that they could pass or not depending on
the version of the standalone player being launched, because bugs were
fixed in later versions of the player /AVM.

I have my local FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER pointing to a 22 version. I know that
version is used in some of the build configs as well, but it seems that the
player version for testing on the CI server was something between 11.2 and
20 so that firstly seems inconsistent with version 22 used elsewhere.

So two topics really:

1. General request: Could we agree to standardize the version of the flash
player we use for RoyaleUnit testing for CI builds? And what version should
that be. I don't really mind what that is although I think more recent
versions make sense mainly because I think we should be aiming to emulate
the most up to date version of the player behavior with various bug fixes.
However mostly I just would like to be aware of it so I can match it
locally.

2. For Josh, a request:
Could we have RoyaleUnit configurable for the player that should be used
for testing (with the system player as fallback)?
I was able to do this quickly locally in WindowsDefaults.java by doing the
following:

public String getOpenCommand()
{
if (System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER") != null) {
return System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER");
}
return "rundll32";
}

public String[] getOpenSystemArguments()
{
if (System.getenv("FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER") != null) {
return new String[]{""};
}
return new String[]{"url.dll,FileProtocolHandler"};
}

I am not sure if it should be using the same ' FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER' env
var  there that we use elsewhere or not... but I was able to use that
approach to quickly cycle through a lot of different player versions with
the tests to find the versions that had the issue.
If it needs to be different it could be something that is specific to
RoyaleUnit... ROYALEUNIT_SWF_PLAYER or anything really. I don't know if
this approach works the same on mac... anyhow please consider that
(generally) as a possible addition for Royaleunit.

Re: Nightly Build Server going offline

OK, I will switch the service to use the ApacheRoyaleCI account and see what 
happens.

-ALex

On 10/9/19, 9:12 AM, "Josh Tynjala"  wrote:

Well, the build made it a bit further after I set the default app for .swf
files. However, it seems that Flash Player is not picking up the trust file
that the RoyaleUnit Ant Task is creating. Based on the console log, the
Jenkins job seems to be creating it here:

C:\windows\system32\config\systemprofile\AppData\Roaming\Macromedia\Flash
Player\#Security\FlashPlayerTrust\royaleUnit.cfg

Looking at Jenkins emails from the old server, it used to be in the user
folder instead

C:\Users\apacheroyale\AppData\Roaming\Macromedia\Flash
Player\#Security\FlashPlayerTrust\royaleUnit.cfg

I guess that would be C:\Users\ApacheRoyaleCI\ on the new server. It looks
like royaleUnit.cfg exists in the user folder too, but I'm guessing that's
from when I ran the tests manually. So maybe that's an interesting clue? Is
the Jenkins job running as the ApacheRoyaleCI user, or could it be a
different user account that can't access C:\Users\ApacheRoyaleCI\? I don't
really know Jenkins, so I'm just throwing out ideas here.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 



On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:21 AM Josh Tynjala 
wrote:

> I logged into the server and discovered that js-swf build was failing
> because there was no default program for .swf files. I set the
> flashplayerdebugger.exe that you downloaded as the default, and I was able
> to successfully run the tests in a PowerShell window. I started a new 
build
> in Jenkins, so we should hopefully see how it goes in a few minutes.
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC 

>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:08 AM Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
>> I sent an email to private@ with the new credentials and URL.  I don't
>> know how to get the old URL back at this point in time.  The JSOnly build
>> succeeded.  I'm trying to get the JS-SWF build to succeed.
>>
>> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com%3A8080data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ca0a8b694fff24a69908b08d74cd380a7%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062343589207904sdata=Syw8dIiAfta0WLwjYLZNc0VAuTlx%2BQQTunbzq7fNko4%3Dreserved=0
>>
>> We should update all links to use the new URL.  Having someone else do
>> what would be appreciated.
>>
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 10/9/19, 6:23 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
>>
>> Hope Alex can let us know what he thinks about timing
>> We can do a quick change directly in production if needed and then
>> revert
>> when needed to not mesh with pre for something punctual...
>>
>> El mié., 9 oct. 2019 a las 9:50, Piotr Zarzycki (<
>> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
>> escribió:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > If we are going to stay for a longer time with nightly build
>> offline we
>> > should also update link to nightly build on our website. If it's
>> only for
>> > couple of days no problem.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Piotr
>> >
>> > wt., 8 paź 2019 o 20:04 Carlos Rovira 
>> > napisał(a):
>> >
>> > > 爛
>> > >
>> > > :)
>> > >
>> > > El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 18:12, Alex Harui
>> (> > >)
>> > > escribió:
>> > >
>> > > > I am definitely planning to start rebuilding the server today.
>> Keep
>> > your
>> > > > fingers crossed.
>> > > >
>> > > > -Alex
>> > > >
>> > > > On 10/7/19, 8:47 AM, "Alex Harui" 
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I think the merge happened, so I am going to try to do the
>> rebuild
>> > > > this week, probably on my Tuesday if I can finish up some fixes
>> to
>> > > > releasecandidate.xml needed for Windows today.
>> > > >
>> > > > -Alex
>> > > >
>> > > > On 10/7/19, 12:39 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
>> carlosrov...@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > >
>> > > > don't think a day be a problem. When can better warn

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

When you build with AIR_HOME (which is required to create release artifacts, 
since we want to produce both jsonly and js-swf in one run), a different target 
called "jsonly-package" run and tries to muck with some files before packaging 
the js-only artifacts.  It could be that the jsonly-package needs updating now 
that SWF SWCs are listed in royale-config.xml.  That means we've had this bug 
for months and nobody noticed until now.

-Alex

On 10/9/19, 9:38 AM, "Josh Tynjala"  wrote:

It looks like the Ant target that updates the library-path for the JS-only
build is called tweak-for-jsonly. Copied here for convenience:

https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2Fasn0idata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=7h3ZHxgGsfZqP8kE22amKQYDr7%2BNyQa7EpoG86147uU%3Dreserved=0

I see that it has unless="env.AIR_HOME", which means that this target is
skipped if the AIR_HOME environment variable is set. With that in mind, I'm
guessing that AIR_HOME needs to be set for the js-swf build, but cleared
for the js-only build.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:52 AM Piotr Zarzycki 
wrote:

> Hi Guys,
>
> It looks like we have broken royale-config in released SDK. Andrew raised
> in Moonshine GitHub issue that he couldn't build Hello World project. I
> tried Moonshine and downloaded JS-only version of SDK. I get following
> error [1].
> I downloaded JS-SWF version and tried compile project again - this time it
> went fine.
>
> JS-only version of released 0.9.6 contains in section   -
> list of swc. - Those swc doesn't exists in JS-only.
>
> Fragment of config
>
> > 
> >  libs/Basic.swc
> >  libs/Binding.swc
> >  libs/Charts.swc
> >  libs/Collections.swc
> >  libs/Core.swc
> > 
>
>
> JS-only nightly build of 0.9.7 - doesn't contains in that section anything
>
> >   
> >   
>
>
> [1] 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpaste.apache.org%2F2lgvkdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=IebVohnQGkmg%2BAO2RJCS2LRTdP3LQE0NoQ%2BUt7xlOJI%3Dreserved=0
>
> Thanks,
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: 
*https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.patreon.com%2Fpiotrzarzyckidata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C972794372a8a4037148008d74cd72cc9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637062359364655836sdata=BmbfQaY1AjgUQk61TOlDZqRi1jWSJWDFaxgzaFiw1c4%3Dreserved=0
> 
*
>

Re: CI emails

IOM, we need the committers to see these in order to fix broken builds.  You 
might be better off filtering out email from apacheroyal...@gmail.com

HTH,
-Alex

On 10/9/19, 1:11 AM, "Chris Velevitch"  wrote:

I'd like to suggest a new mailing list be created for all the CI and
other build related emails. I'm suggesting this to keep the dev
mailing clean from these automated emails.

-- 


Chris
--
Chris Velevitch
m: 0415 469 095

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs #8

See 


Changes:


--
[...truncated 1.34 MB...]
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ITextItemRenderer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UIItemRendererBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataItemRenderer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: StringItemRenderer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStatesObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IApplicationView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IValuesImpl
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IDocument
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IItemRendererClassFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemRendererClassFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SimpleValuesImpl
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ValuesManager
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MouseEventConverter
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRoyaleEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Event
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ValueChangeEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MXMLDataInterpreter
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRunListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IAsyncStartupRunListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CIListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Descriptor
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRunNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RunNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ITestRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ParentRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ChildNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RoyaleUnitCore
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ClassesRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RootRunNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Runtime
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataGridColumnTest
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ButtonAutoRepeatController
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataFieldProviderBead
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DownArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HScrollBarThumbView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HScrollBarTrackView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: LeftArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RightArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UpArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: VScrollBarThumbView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: VScrollBarTrackView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IChrome
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IViewportScroller
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ScrollBar
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HScrollBar
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: VScrollBar
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UIButtonBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ButtonBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Button
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: EdgeData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MarginData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CSSTextField
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ClassFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IBorderPaddingMarginValuesImpl
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IContainer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IItemRendererProvider
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ILayoutParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IListPresentationModel
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IMXMLDocument
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IMeasurementBead
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStyleObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ITextModel
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SimpleCSSStyles
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: StageProxy
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IHandlesOriginalEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CustomEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemAddedEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemClickedEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemRemovedEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemRendererEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MouseEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Size
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CSSBorderUtils
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CSSUtils
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Timer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DefinitionBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MetaDataArgDefinition
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MetaDataDefinition
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DefinitionWithMetaData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: TypeDefinition
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Failure
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Result
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ResultListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IAsyncHandler
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MetadataRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: TestInfo
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: AsyncHandler
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SuiteRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: TestMetadata
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: AssertionError
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IDataGridColumn
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataGridColumn
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: LayoutData
[mxmlc]

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

It looks like the Ant target that updates the library-path for the JS-only
build is called tweak-for-jsonly. Copied here for convenience:

https://paste.apache.org/asn0i

I see that it has unless="env.AIR_HOME", which means that this target is
skipped if the AIR_HOME environment variable is set. With that in mind, I'm
guessing that AIR_HOME needs to be set for the js-swf build, but cleared
for the js-only build.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 

On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:52 AM Piotr Zarzycki 
wrote:

> Hi Guys,
>
> It looks like we have broken royale-config in released SDK. Andrew raised
> in Moonshine GitHub issue that he couldn't build Hello World project. I
> tried Moonshine and downloaded JS-only version of SDK. I get following
> error [1].
> I downloaded JS-SWF version and tried compile project again - this time it
> went fine.
>
> JS-only version of released 0.9.6 contains in section   -
> list of swc. - Those swc doesn't exists in JS-only.
>
> Fragment of config
>
> > 
> >  libs/Basic.swc
> >  libs/Binding.swc
> >  libs/Charts.swc
> >  libs/Collections.swc
> >  libs/Core.swc
> > 
>
>
> JS-only nightly build of 0.9.7 - doesn't contains in that section anything
>
> >   
> >   
>
>
> [1] https://paste.apache.org/2lgvk
>
> Thanks,
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> *
>

Re: Nightly Build Server going offline

Well, the build made it a bit further after I set the default app for .swf
files. However, it seems that Flash Player is not picking up the trust file
that the RoyaleUnit Ant Task is creating. Based on the console log, the
Jenkins job seems to be creating it here:

C:\windows\system32\config\systemprofile\AppData\Roaming\Macromedia\Flash
Player\#Security\FlashPlayerTrust\royaleUnit.cfg

Looking at Jenkins emails from the old server, it used to be in the user
folder instead

C:\Users\apacheroyale\AppData\Roaming\Macromedia\Flash
Player\#Security\FlashPlayerTrust\royaleUnit.cfg

I guess that would be C:\Users\ApacheRoyaleCI\ on the new server. It looks
like royaleUnit.cfg exists in the user folder too, but I'm guessing that's
from when I ran the tests manually. So maybe that's an interesting clue? Is
the Jenkins job running as the ApacheRoyaleCI user, or could it be a
different user account that can't access C:\Users\ApacheRoyaleCI\? I don't
really know Jenkins, so I'm just throwing out ideas here.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 


On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:21 AM Josh Tynjala 
wrote:

> I logged into the server and discovered that js-swf build was failing
> because there was no default program for .swf files. I set the
> flashplayerdebugger.exe that you downloaded as the default, and I was able
> to successfully run the tests in a PowerShell window. I started a new build
> in Jenkins, so we should hopefully see how it goes in a few minutes.
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC 
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:08 AM Alex Harui 
> wrote:
>
>> I sent an email to private@ with the new credentials and URL.  I don't
>> know how to get the old URL back at this point in time.  The JSOnly build
>> succeeded.  I'm trying to get the JS-SWF build to succeed.
>>
>> http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080
>>
>> We should update all links to use the new URL.  Having someone else do
>> what would be appreciated.
>>
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 10/9/19, 6:23 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
>>
>> Hope Alex can let us know what he thinks about timing
>> We can do a quick change directly in production if needed and then
>> revert
>> when needed to not mesh with pre for something punctual...
>>
>> El mié., 9 oct. 2019 a las 9:50, Piotr Zarzycki (<
>> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
>> escribió:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > If we are going to stay for a longer time with nightly build
>> offline we
>> > should also update link to nightly build on our website. If it's
>> only for
>> > couple of days no problem.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Piotr
>> >
>> > wt., 8 paź 2019 o 20:04 Carlos Rovira 
>> > napisał(a):
>> >
>> > > 爛
>> > >
>> > > :)
>> > >
>> > > El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 18:12, Alex Harui
>> (> > >)
>> > > escribió:
>> > >
>> > > > I am definitely planning to start rebuilding the server today.
>> Keep
>> > your
>> > > > fingers crossed.
>> > > >
>> > > > -Alex
>> > > >
>> > > > On 10/7/19, 8:47 AM, "Alex Harui" 
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I think the merge happened, so I am going to try to do the
>> rebuild
>> > > > this week, probably on my Tuesday if I can finish up some fixes
>> to
>> > > > releasecandidate.xml needed for Windows today.
>> > > >
>> > > > -Alex
>> > > >
>> > > > On 10/7/19, 12:39 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
>> carlosrov...@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > >
>> > > > don't think a day be a problem. When can better warn in
>> social
>> > > > networks
>> > > > about that 24h unavailability.
>> > > > Other option is to store in pre web server (
>> > > Royale.codeoscopic.com).
>> > > > You
>> > > > have credentials and can upload to Wordpress and then
>> we can
>> > > share
>> > > > that
>> > > > link.
>> > > > Whatever option could be fine, but for a day, I don't
>> think we
>> > > > should
>> > > > invest much time.
>> > > >
>> > > > thanks!
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > El dom., 6 oct. 2019 a las 9:28, Harbs (<
>> harbs.li...@gmail.com
>> > >)
>> > > > escribió:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Seems fine to me.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > On Oct 6, 2019, at 1:33 AM, Alex Harui
>> > > >  wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I was only thinking about temporary distribution of
>> the
>> > > > nightly build
>> > > > > while the CI server is offline.  I'm not sure it
>> makes sense
>> > to
>> > > > always copy
>> > > > > the nightly build somewhere else.  I think the
>> bandwidth
>> > would
>> > > > add up.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > I'm mainly asking if anyone thinks it would be a
>> problem if

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs #7

See 


Changes:


--
[...truncated 1.34 MB...]
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ITextItemRenderer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UIItemRendererBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataItemRenderer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: StringItemRenderer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStatesObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IApplicationView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IValuesImpl
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IDocument
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IItemRendererClassFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemRendererClassFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SimpleValuesImpl
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ValuesManager
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MouseEventConverter
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRoyaleEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Event
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ValueChangeEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MXMLDataInterpreter
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRunListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IAsyncStartupRunListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CIListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Descriptor
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRunNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RunNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ITestRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ParentRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ChildNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RoyaleUnitCore
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ClassesRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RootRunNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Runtime
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataGridColumnTest
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ButtonAutoRepeatController
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataFieldProviderBead
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DownArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HScrollBarThumbView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HScrollBarTrackView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: LeftArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RightArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UpArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: VScrollBarThumbView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: VScrollBarTrackView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IChrome
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IViewportScroller
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ScrollBar
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HScrollBar
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: VScrollBar
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UIButtonBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ButtonBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Button
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: EdgeData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MarginData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CSSTextField
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ClassFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IBorderPaddingMarginValuesImpl
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IContainer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IItemRendererProvider
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ILayoutParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IListPresentationModel
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IMXMLDocument
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IMeasurementBead
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStyleObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ITextModel
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SimpleCSSStyles
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: StageProxy
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IHandlesOriginalEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CustomEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemAddedEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemClickedEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemRemovedEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemRendererEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MouseEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Size
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CSSBorderUtils
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CSSUtils
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Timer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DefinitionBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MetaDataArgDefinition
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MetaDataDefinition
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DefinitionWithMetaData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: TypeDefinition
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Failure
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Result
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ResultListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IAsyncHandler
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MetadataRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: TestInfo
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: AsyncHandler
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SuiteRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: TestMetadata
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: AssertionError
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IDataGridColumn
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataGridColumn
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: LayoutData
[mxmlc]

Re: Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

I just installed @apache-royale/royale-js from npm, and I'm seeing the same
errors.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 


On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 6:52 AM Piotr Zarzycki 
wrote:

> Hi Guys,
>
> It looks like we have broken royale-config in released SDK. Andrew raised
> in Moonshine GitHub issue that he couldn't build Hello World project. I
> tried Moonshine and downloaded JS-only version of SDK. I get following
> error [1].
> I downloaded JS-SWF version and tried compile project again - this time it
> went fine.
>
> JS-only version of released 0.9.6 contains in section   -
> list of swc. - Those swc doesn't exists in JS-only.
>
> Fragment of config
>
> > 
> >  libs/Basic.swc
> >  libs/Binding.swc
> >  libs/Charts.swc
> >  libs/Collections.swc
> >  libs/Core.swc
> > 
>
>
> JS-only nightly build of 0.9.7 - doesn't contains in that section anything
>
> >   
> >   
>
>
> [1] https://paste.apache.org/2lgvk
>
> Thanks,
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> *
>

Re: Nightly Build Server going offline

I logged into the server and discovered that js-swf build was failing
because there was no default program for .swf files. I set the
flashplayerdebugger.exe that you downloaded as the default, and I was able
to successfully run the tests in a PowerShell window. I started a new build
in Jenkins, so we should hopefully see how it goes in a few minutes.

--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC 


On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:08 AM Alex Harui  wrote:

> I sent an email to private@ with the new credentials and URL.  I don't
> know how to get the old URL back at this point in time.  The JSOnly build
> succeeded.  I'm trying to get the JS-SWF build to succeed.
>
> http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080
>
> We should update all links to use the new URL.  Having someone else do
> what would be appreciated.
>
>
> -Alex
>
> On 10/9/19, 6:23 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
>
> Hope Alex can let us know what he thinks about timing
> We can do a quick change directly in production if needed and then
> revert
> when needed to not mesh with pre for something punctual...
>
> El mié., 9 oct. 2019 a las 9:50, Piotr Zarzycki (<
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > If we are going to stay for a longer time with nightly build offline
> we
> > should also update link to nightly build on our website. If it's
> only for
> > couple of days no problem.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Piotr
> >
> > wt., 8 paź 2019 o 20:04 Carlos Rovira 
> > napisał(a):
> >
> > > 爛
> > >
> > > :)
> > >
> > > El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 18:12, Alex Harui
> ( > >)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > I am definitely planning to start rebuilding the server today.
> Keep
> > your
> > > > fingers crossed.
> > > >
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 10/7/19, 8:47 AM, "Alex Harui" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I think the merge happened, so I am going to try to do the
> rebuild
> > > > this week, probably on my Tuesday if I can finish up some fixes
> to
> > > > releasecandidate.xml needed for Windows today.
> > > >
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 10/7/19, 12:39 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > don't think a day be a problem. When can better warn in
> social
> > > > networks
> > > > about that 24h unavailability.
> > > > Other option is to store in pre web server (
> > > Royale.codeoscopic.com).
> > > > You
> > > > have credentials and can upload to Wordpress and then we
> can
> > > share
> > > > that
> > > > link.
> > > > Whatever option could be fine, but for a day, I don't
> think we
> > > > should
> > > > invest much time.
> > > >
> > > > thanks!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > El dom., 6 oct. 2019 a las 9:28, Harbs (<
> harbs.li...@gmail.com
> > >)
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > > > Seems fine to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Oct 6, 2019, at 1:33 AM, Alex Harui
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I was only thinking about temporary distribution of
> the
> > > > nightly build
> > > > > while the CI server is offline.  I'm not sure it makes
> sense
> > to
> > > > always copy
> > > > > the nightly build somewhere else.  I think the
> bandwidth
> > would
> > > > add up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm mainly asking if anyone thinks it would be a
> problem if
> > > > the nightly
> > > > > builds were unavailable for a day (hopefully only a
> day).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Alex
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/5/19, 6:41 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > > carlosrov...@apache.org
> > > >  > > > > carlosrov...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Hi Alex,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >you're talking about just storing nightly builds?
> what
> > > > about using
> > > > > some
> > > > > >free storage out there, like a google drive,
> dropbox, or
> > > > other
> > > > > service like
> > > > > >this. We can create an "apacheroyale" account and
> share
> > > > credentials in
> > > > > >private.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >El sáb., 5 oct. 2019 a las 2:18, Alex Harui
> > > > ( > > > > >)
> > > > > >escribió:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Hi,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> To prove that we can rebuild our nightly build
> server (so
> > > > that someone
> > > > > >> else can host a build

Re: Nightly Build Server going offline

I sent an email to private@ with the new credentials and URL.  I don't know how 
to get the old URL back at this point in time.  The JSOnly build succeeded.  
I'm trying to get the JS-SWF build to succeed.

http://apacheroyaleci2.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080

We should update all links to use the new URL.  Having someone else do what 
would be appreciated.


-Alex

On 10/9/19, 6:23 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:

Hope Alex can let us know what he thinks about timing
We can do a quick change directly in production if needed and then revert
when needed to not mesh with pre for something punctual...

El mié., 9 oct. 2019 a las 9:50, Piotr Zarzycki 
()
escribió:

> Hi,
>
> If we are going to stay for a longer time with nightly build offline we
> should also update link to nightly build on our website. If it's only for
> couple of days no problem.
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> wt., 8 paź 2019 o 20:04 Carlos Rovira 
> napisał(a):
>
> > 爛
> >
> > :)
> >
> > El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 18:12, Alex Harui ( >)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > I am definitely planning to start rebuilding the server today.  Keep
> your
> > > fingers crossed.
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 10/7/19, 8:47 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> > >
> > > I think the merge happened, so I am going to try to do the rebuild
> > > this week, probably on my Tuesday if I can finish up some fixes to
> > > releasecandidate.xml needed for Windows today.
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 10/7/19, 12:39 AM, "Carlos Rovira" 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > don't think a day be a problem. When can better warn in social
> > > networks
> > > about that 24h unavailability.
> > > Other option is to store in pre web server (
> > Royale.codeoscopic.com).
> > > You
> > > have credentials and can upload to Wordpress and then we can
> > share
> > > that
> > > link.
> > > Whatever option could be fine, but for a day, I don't think we
> > > should
> > > invest much time.
> > >
> > > thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > El dom., 6 oct. 2019 a las 9:28, Harbs ( >)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > Seems fine to me.
> > > >
> > > > > On Oct 6, 2019, at 1:33 AM, Alex Harui
> > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I was only thinking about temporary distribution of the
> > > nightly build
> > > > while the CI server is offline.  I'm not sure it makes sense
> to
> > > always copy
> > > > the nightly build somewhere else.  I think the bandwidth
> would
> > > add up.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm mainly asking if anyone thinks it would be a problem 
if
> > > the nightly
> > > > builds were unavailable for a day (hopefully only a day).
> > > > >
> > > > > -Alex
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/19, 6:41 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > carlosrov...@apache.org
> > >  > > > carlosrov...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >Hi Alex,
> > > > >
> > > > >you're talking about just storing nightly builds? what
> > > about using
> > > > some
> > > > >free storage out there, like a google drive, dropbox, 
or
> > > other
> > > > service like
> > > > >this. We can create an "apacheroyale" account and share
> > > credentials in
> > > > >private.
> > > > >
> > > > >El sáb., 5 oct. 2019 a las 2:18, Alex Harui
> > > ( > > > >)
> > > > >escribió:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> To prove that we can rebuild our nightly build server (so
> > > that someone
> > > > >> else can host a build server someday and to prove we know
> > > what our
> > > > >> dependencies are), I'm going to try to rebuild it once 
the
> > > release
> > > > branch
> > > > >> is merged into develop.  Could just take a day if I've
> saved
> > > a record of
> > > > >> everything we need.  Or not...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There will be other emails when I finally shut it down to
> > try
> > > it.  If
> > > > >> someone wants to host the last nightly somewhere and
> update
> > > our links to
> > > > >> it, great, otherwise we'll just cross our fingers...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >> -Alex
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >

Broken royale-config in JS only build of released Apache Royale SDK 0.9.6

Hi Guys,

It looks like we have broken royale-config in released SDK. Andrew raised
in Moonshine GitHub issue that he couldn't build Hello World project. I
tried Moonshine and downloaded JS-only version of SDK. I get following
error [1].
I downloaded JS-SWF version and tried compile project again - this time it
went fine.

JS-only version of released 0.9.6 contains in section   -
list of swc. - Those swc doesn't exists in JS-only.

Fragment of config

> 
>  libs/Basic.swc
>  libs/Binding.swc
>  libs/Charts.swc
>  libs/Collections.swc
>  libs/Core.swc
> 


JS-only nightly build of 0.9.7 - doesn't contains in that section anything

>   
>   


[1] https://paste.apache.org/2lgvk

Thanks,
-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
*

Re: maven fails on build royale-asjs 0.9.7-SNAPSHOT

Many thanks Greg,

your change worked for me and I can rely on it in the meanwhile.

Thanks! :)

El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 21:11, Greg Dove ()
escribió:

> Carlos, you need:
>
> mvn clean install -Pmain,generate-swcs-for-swf -Dgenerate.swf.swcs=true
>
> But I think that could be avoided. I hope to check today with empty maven
> repo
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 8:00 AM Carlos Rovira 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > just trying to build as usual, but now with new 0.9.7-SNAPSHOT
> > when reach royale-asjs try to build with:
> >
> > mvn clean install -Pgenerate-swcs-for-swf,main -DskipTests
> >
> > and getting this error:
> >
> > https://paste.apache.org/kt8wi
> >
> > Maybe I miss some latest change?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
>


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

Re: Nightly Build Server going offline

Hope Alex can let us know what he thinks about timing
We can do a quick change directly in production if needed and then revert
when needed to not mesh with pre for something punctual...

El mié., 9 oct. 2019 a las 9:50, Piotr Zarzycki ()
escribió:

> Hi,
>
> If we are going to stay for a longer time with nightly build offline we
> should also update link to nightly build on our website. If it's only for
> couple of days no problem.
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> wt., 8 paź 2019 o 20:04 Carlos Rovira 
> napisał(a):
>
> > 爛
> >
> > :)
> >
> > El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 18:12, Alex Harui ( >)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > I am definitely planning to start rebuilding the server today.  Keep
> your
> > > fingers crossed.
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 10/7/19, 8:47 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> > >
> > > I think the merge happened, so I am going to try to do the rebuild
> > > this week, probably on my Tuesday if I can finish up some fixes to
> > > releasecandidate.xml needed for Windows today.
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 10/7/19, 12:39 AM, "Carlos Rovira" 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > don't think a day be a problem. When can better warn in social
> > > networks
> > > about that 24h unavailability.
> > > Other option is to store in pre web server (
> > Royale.codeoscopic.com).
> > > You
> > > have credentials and can upload to Wordpress and then we can
> > share
> > > that
> > > link.
> > > Whatever option could be fine, but for a day, I don't think we
> > > should
> > > invest much time.
> > >
> > > thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > El dom., 6 oct. 2019 a las 9:28, Harbs ( >)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > Seems fine to me.
> > > >
> > > > > On Oct 6, 2019, at 1:33 AM, Alex Harui
> > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I was only thinking about temporary distribution of the
> > > nightly build
> > > > while the CI server is offline.  I'm not sure it makes sense
> to
> > > always copy
> > > > the nightly build somewhere else.  I think the bandwidth
> would
> > > add up.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm mainly asking if anyone thinks it would be a problem if
> > > the nightly
> > > > builds were unavailable for a day (hopefully only a day).
> > > > >
> > > > > -Alex
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10/5/19, 6:41 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > carlosrov...@apache.org
> > >  > > > carlosrov...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >Hi Alex,
> > > > >
> > > > >you're talking about just storing nightly builds? what
> > > about using
> > > > some
> > > > >free storage out there, like a google drive, dropbox, or
> > > other
> > > > service like
> > > > >this. We can create an "apacheroyale" account and share
> > > credentials in
> > > > >private.
> > > > >
> > > > >El sáb., 5 oct. 2019 a las 2:18, Alex Harui
> > > ( > > > >)
> > > > >escribió:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> To prove that we can rebuild our nightly build server (so
> > > that someone
> > > > >> else can host a build server someday and to prove we know
> > > what our
> > > > >> dependencies are), I'm going to try to rebuild it once the
> > > release
> > > > branch
> > > > >> is merged into develop.  Could just take a day if I've
> saved
> > > a record of
> > > > >> everything we need.  Or not...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There will be other emails when I finally shut it down to
> > try
> > > it.  If
> > > > >> someone wants to host the last nightly somewhere and
> update
> > > our links to
> > > > >> it, great, otherwise we'll just cross our fingers...
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >> -Alex
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >--
> > > > >Carlos Rovira
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosroviradata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6f4957799c04453d1ef308d74b3da007%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637060600359555721sdata=AB%2BoIdhv4B5EMHSvpOwX9XEZTPgZVdW5Rs7mOEI0fHw%3Dreserved=0
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosroviradata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6f4957799c04453d1ef308d74b3da007%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637060600359565716sdata=O6hyvC%2FH%2BuPOuD8K%2FHBC4YYM71aEPEcvMs8ufKZkXqU%3Dreserved=0
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: How to skin components

Thanks for consider it Chris,

about you question, I saw it responded in other of your thread by Alex.

Thanks



El mié., 9 oct. 2019 a las 9:57, Chris Velevitch ()
escribió:

> My apologies. I'll be more thoughtful and considerate in the future.
>
> On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 23:32, Carlos Rovira 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Chris,
> > before going far beyond, I want that you consider the way you are
> referring
> > to the concepts you don't share. Talk about that as "silly" seems not
> very
> > appropriate.
> > We try to respect as much as possible, the work and proposals from
> others.
> > You can disagree, but please maintain a level of respect since that way
> > will make others not want to enter the conversation.
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 9:47, Chris Velevitch (<
> chris.velevi...@gmail.com>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > When I was going through the documentation and code to get my head
> > > around this silly notation of "beads" and "strands", I realised the
> > > component plugins are very similar to the concept of skinning
> > > components that Adobe Flex talks about. And there doesn't seem to be
> > > any discussions on how to skin a component.
> > >
> > > I also noticed, there's no discussion on how plugins and components
> > > talk to each other and whether that is bidirectional or one-way.
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
>
> --
>
>
> Chris
> --
> Chris Velevitch
> m: 0415 469 095
>


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

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs #6

See 


Changes:


--
[...truncated 1.35 MB...]
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IApplicationView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IValuesImpl
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IDocument
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IItemRendererClassFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemRendererClassFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SimpleValuesImpl
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ValuesManager
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MouseEventConverter
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRoyaleEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Event
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ValueChangeEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MXMLDataInterpreter
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRunListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IAsyncStartupRunListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CIListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Descriptor
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IRunNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RunNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ITestRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ParentRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ChildNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RoyaleUnitCore
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ClassesRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RootRunNotifier
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Runtime
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataGridColumnTest
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ButtonAutoRepeatController
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataFieldProviderBead
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DownArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HScrollBarThumbView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HScrollBarTrackView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: LeftArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: RightArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UpArrowButtonView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: VScrollBarThumbView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: VScrollBarTrackView
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IChrome
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IViewportScroller
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ScrollBar
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: HScrollBar
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: VScrollBar
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: UIButtonBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ButtonBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Button
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: EdgeData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MarginData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CSSTextField
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ClassFactory
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IBorderPaddingMarginValuesImpl
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IContainer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IItemRendererProvider
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ILayoutParent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IListPresentationModel
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IMXMLDocument
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IMeasurementBead
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IStyleObject
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ITextModel
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SimpleCSSStyles
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: StageProxy
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IHandlesOriginalEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CustomEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemAddedEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemClickedEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemRemovedEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ItemRendererEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MouseEvent
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Size
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CSSBorderUtils
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: CSSUtils
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Timer
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DefinitionBase
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MetaDataArgDefinition
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MetaDataDefinition
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DefinitionWithMetaData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: TypeDefinition
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Failure
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Result
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ResultListener
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IAsyncHandler
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: MetadataRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: TestInfo
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: AsyncHandler
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SuiteRunner
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: TestMetadata
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: AssertionError
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: IDataGridColumn
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: DataGridColumn
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: LayoutData
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: BorderStyles
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: Point
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: PointUtils
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SolidBorderUtil
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides: StringPadder
[mxmlc] scanning for overrides:

CI emails

2019-10-09 Thread Chris Velevitch

I'd like to suggest a new mailing list be created for all the CI and
other build related emails. I'm suggesting this to keep the dev
mailing clean from these automated emails.

-- 


Chris
--
Chris Velevitch
m: 0415 469 095

Re: How to skin components

2019-10-09 Thread Chris Velevitch

My apologies. I'll be more thoughtful and considerate in the future.

On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 at 23:32, Carlos Rovira  wrote:
>
> Hi Chris,
> before going far beyond, I want that you consider the way you are referring
> to the concepts you don't share. Talk about that as "silly" seems not very
> appropriate.
> We try to respect as much as possible, the work and proposals from others.
> You can disagree, but please maintain a level of respect since that way
> will make others not want to enter the conversation.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 9:47, Chris Velevitch ()
> escribió:
>
> > When I was going through the documentation and code to get my head
> > around this silly notation of "beads" and "strands", I realised the
> > component plugins are very similar to the concept of skinning
> > components that Adobe Flex talks about. And there doesn't seem to be
> > any discussions on how to skin a component.
> >
> > I also noticed, there's no discussion on how plugins and components
> > talk to each other and whether that is bidirectional or one-way.
> >
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira



-- 


Chris
--
Chris Velevitch
m: 0415 469 095

Re: Nightly Build Server going offline

Hi,

If we are going to stay for a longer time with nightly build offline we
should also update link to nightly build on our website. If it's only for
couple of days no problem.

Thanks,
Piotr

wt., 8 paź 2019 o 20:04 Carlos Rovira  napisał(a):

> 爛
>
> :)
>
> El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 18:12, Alex Harui ()
> escribió:
>
> > I am definitely planning to start rebuilding the server today.  Keep your
> > fingers crossed.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 10/7/19, 8:47 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> >
> > I think the merge happened, so I am going to try to do the rebuild
> > this week, probably on my Tuesday if I can finish up some fixes to
> > releasecandidate.xml needed for Windows today.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 10/7/19, 12:39 AM, "Carlos Rovira" 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > don't think a day be a problem. When can better warn in social
> > networks
> > about that 24h unavailability.
> > Other option is to store in pre web server (
> Royale.codeoscopic.com).
> > You
> > have credentials and can upload to Wordpress and then we can
> share
> > that
> > link.
> > Whatever option could be fine, but for a day, I don't think we
> > should
> > invest much time.
> >
> > thanks!
> >
> >
> >
> > El dom., 6 oct. 2019 a las 9:28, Harbs ()
> > escribió:
> >
> > > Seems fine to me.
> > >
> > > > On Oct 6, 2019, at 1:33 AM, Alex Harui
> >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was only thinking about temporary distribution of the
> > nightly build
> > > while the CI server is offline.  I'm not sure it makes sense to
> > always copy
> > > the nightly build somewhere else.  I think the bandwidth would
> > add up.
> > > >
> > > > I'm mainly asking if anyone thinks it would be a problem if
> > the nightly
> > > builds were unavailable for a day (hopefully only a day).
> > > >
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 10/5/19, 6:41 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> carlosrov...@apache.org
> >  > > carlosrov...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Hi Alex,
> > > >
> > > >you're talking about just storing nightly builds? what
> > about using
> > > some
> > > >free storage out there, like a google drive, dropbox, or
> > other
> > > service like
> > > >this. We can create an "apacheroyale" account and share
> > credentials in
> > > >private.
> > > >
> > > >El sáb., 5 oct. 2019 a las 2:18, Alex Harui
> > ( > > >)
> > > >escribió:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> To prove that we can rebuild our nightly build server (so
> > that someone
> > > >> else can host a build server someday and to prove we know
> > what our
> > > >> dependencies are), I'm going to try to rebuild it once the
> > release
> > > branch
> > > >> is merged into develop.  Could just take a day if I've saved
> > a record of
> > > >> everything we need.  Or not...
> > > >>
> > > >> There will be other emails when I finally shut it down to
> try
> > it.  If
> > > >> someone wants to host the last nightly somewhere and update
> > our links to
> > > >> it, great, otherwise we'll just cross our fingers...
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> -Alex
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >Carlos Rovira
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosroviradata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6f4957799c04453d1ef308d74b3da007%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637060600359555721sdata=AB%2BoIdhv4B5EMHSvpOwX9XEZTPgZVdW5Rs7mOEI0fHw%3Dreserved=0
> > > <
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosroviradata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6f4957799c04453d1ef308d74b3da007%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637060600359565716sdata=O6hyvC%2FH%2BuPOuD8K%2FHBC4YYM71aEPEcvMs8ufKZkXqU%3Dreserved=0
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosroviradata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6f4957799c04453d1ef308d74b3da007%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637060600359565716sdata=O6hyvC%2FH%2BuPOuD8K%2FHBC4YYM71aEPEcvMs8ufKZkXqU%3Dreserved=0
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>


-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
*

[ANNOUNCE] Apache Royale 0.9.6 released!

The Apache Royale community is pleased to announce the release of Apache
Royale 0.9.6.

The Apache Royale project is the next generation of the Apache Flex SDK. It
lets developers use MXML and ActionScript 3 to generate HTML/JS/CSS
applications which can run natively in browsers. The cross-compiled code
can also run on platforms like Electron or Apache Cordova (Adobe PhoneGap)
to build mobile applications.

This release should be considered ‘beta’ quality, although we’re very close
to a 1.0 release and we have many applications in production at this point.
The purpose of this release is to continue to gather feedback about
Royale’s features and the project’s implementation strategies, and to
recruit new contributors. We hope to grow the code base into an SDK and
tool chain that delivers the highest productivity when developing
applications that can run on many platforms. Beta releases, however, may
not handle all production needs.

Changes in 0.9.6:

Apache Royale Framework 0.9.6:
https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/blob/apache-royale-0.9.6/RELEASE_NOTES.md
Apache Royale Compiler 0.9.6:
https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/blob/apache-royale-0.9.6/RELEASE_NOTES.md

Please file bugs at:

https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/issues

If you happen to know it is a compiler issue, please use:

https://github.com/apache/royale-compiler/issues

For questions about how to use Royale, send email to us...@royale.apache.org.
For questions and feedback on the development of the source code in the
release, send email to dev@royale.apache.org.

Apache Royale is available in source and binary form from the Apache
mirrors:

Source:
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.6/apache-royale-0.9.6-src.tar.gz

http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.6/apache-royale-0.9.6-src.zip

Binary:
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.6/binaries/apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js.tar.gz
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.6/binaries/apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js.zip

Binary with SWF support:
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.6/binaries/apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js-swf.tar.gz
http://www.apache.org/dyn/closer.lua/royale/0.9.6/binaries/apache-royale-0.9.6-bin-js-swf.zip

When downloading from a mirror site, please remember to verify the
downloads using signatures or MD5 hashes.

The binary packages can also be installed via NPM.

Mac:
sudo npm install @apache-royale/royale-js -g

Or for SWF Support:
sudo npm install @apache-royale/royale-js-swf -g

Windows:
npm install @apache-royale/royale-js -g

Or for SWF Support:
npm install @apache-royale/royale-js-swf -g

See the README for more information. The language reference (ASDoc) is
here: http://royale.apache.org/asdoc/

Additional documentation is here: https://apache.github.io/royale-docs/

The documentation is still a work in progress. Volunteers are welcome to
help improve it. Visit http://royale.apache.org/ for links to other
resources.

Please try Royale and become involved in shaping the future of application
development.

The Apache Royale Community
--

Piotr Zarzycki

Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
*

Re: Release 0.9.6 Announce for web post?

Hi Carlos,

I will send announce in couple of minutes. In the meantime I have found
that one thing seems to be wrong in blog post. Sentence:

"Updates to the RELEASE_NOTES made after this file was packaged into the
release artifacts can be found at this link
. You can
see more here
."
First link seems to redirect to blank page.

wt., 8 paź 2019 o 21:48 Piotr Zarzycki 
napisał(a):

> Let me make announce. I will do that tomorrow morning. :)
>
> You can next post social media.
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019, 8:24 PM Carlos Rovira 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> website is updated.
>> @Piotr Zarzycki   do you want to share 0.9.6
>> in social media? or wait for announcement?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>>
>> El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 20:03, Carlos Rovira ()
>> escribió:
>>
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> if you don't mind I take into account for next release, since I'm this
>>> days a bit out of time.
>>> Thanks for taking the review. I'll try to publish now
>>>
>>> Carlos
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 18:57, Andrew Wetmore ()
>>> escribió:
>>>
 I have edited the release. The only thing I would improve, if I could,
 is
 the graphic at the top. The release number appears as "v0.9.6". I am
 pretty
 sure it would be better as "v. 0.9.6", but this is obviously not
 something
 to delay the release for.

 Andrew

 On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 11:56 AM Andrew Wetmore 
 wrote:

 > Got it! Thanks!
 >
 > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 10:49 AM Carlos Rovira <
 carlosrov...@apache.org>
 > wrote:
 >
 >> Yes! that's it :)
 >>
 >>
 >> El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 16:31, Piotr Zarzycki (<
 >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
 >> escribió:
 >>
 >> > I think that would be the link:
 >> > https://royale.codeoscopic.com/apache-royale-v0-9-6-released/
 >> >
 >> > wt., 8 paź 2019 o 16:29 Andrew Wetmore 
 >> napisał(a):
 >> >
 >> > > @Carlos Rovira  where is the draft
 post? I
 >> had
 >> > a
 >> > > hard disk failure this past weekend and am slowly rebuilding my
 >> system.
 >> > > Have to find all my links again.
 >> > >
 >> > > a
 >> > >
 >> > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:48 AM Andrew Wetmore <
 cottag...@gmail.com>
 >> > wrote:
 >> > >
 >> > > > I can do this in a couple of hours
 >> > > >
 >> > > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019, 9:24 AM Carlos Rovira, <
 >> carlosrov...@apache.org>
 >> > > > wrote:
 >> > > >
 >> > > >> Hi Piotr,
 >> > > >>
 >> > > >> I'll wait Andrew's review and then will publish it. If Andrew
 make
 >> his
 >> > > >> changes this afternoon, I can follow up and publish it.
 >> > > >> Then we can post on social networks next or wait to tomorrow
 >> > > >>
 >> > > >>
 >> > > >>
 >> > > >> El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 11:21, Piotr Zarzycki (<
 >> > > >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
 >> > > >> escribió:
 >> > > >>
 >> > > >> > Just to make sure that you understand why I asked you to
 post
 >> > download
 >> > > >> > links on website along with source code.
 >> > > >> >
 >> > > >> > I will announce on dev, users and announce list - someone
 who
 >> read
 >> > > >> email -
 >> > > >> > will have two options:
 >> > > >> > 1) Can click in that email on royale.apache.org
 >> > > >> > 2) Can download directly binaries or source code from
 provided
 >> links
 >> > > in
 >> > > >> the
 >> > > >> > email
 >> > > >> >
 >> > > >> > If user do #1 he will see old links on website which will be
 >> > > >> misleading. -
 >> > > >> > Do you understand now why I asked you to publish stuff
 first ?
 >> > > >> >
 >> > > >> > However as I said if you prefer do this in a opposite way
 that's
 >> > fine
 >> > > >> with
 >> > > >> > me. :)
 >> > > >> >
 >> > > >> >
 >> > > >> > wt., 8 paź 2019 o 11:17 Piotr Zarzycki <
 >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
 >> > > >> > napisał(a):
 >> > > >> >
 >> > > >> > > This is the goal of syncing everything tomorrow. I asked
 you to
 >> > > >> publish
 >> > > >> > > first link and source code on website, cause my announce
 >> probably
 >> > go
 >> > > >> > first
 >> > > >> > > one and I didn't want to mislead with what will be on
 website.
 >> > > >> However if
 >> > > >> > > you wanted to do that differently I'm fine - Couple of
 hours of
 >> > > >> > misleading
 >> > > >> > > doesn't hurts anyone maybe. - We will see tomorrow.
 >> > > >> > >
 >> > > >> > > wt., 8 paź 2019 o 11:05 Carlos Rovira <
 carlosrov...@apache.org
 >> >
 >> > > >> > > napisał(a):
 >> > > >> > >
 >> > > >> > >> Hi,
 >> > > >> > >> ok, is normal,
 >> > > >> > >> as people

Re: Release 0.9.6 Announce for web post?

Hi Piotr,
ok, I'm waiting for your announcement
thanks

El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 21:49, Piotr Zarzycki ()
escribió:

> Let me make announce. I will do that tomorrow morning. :)
>
> You can next post social media.
>
> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019, 8:24 PM Carlos Rovira 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > website is updated.
> > @Piotr Zarzycki   do you want to share 0.9.6
> > in social media? or wait for announcement?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> >
> > El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 20:03, Carlos Rovira (<
> carlosrov...@apache.org>)
> > escribió:
> >
> >> Hi Andrew,
> >>
> >> if you don't mind I take into account for next release, since I'm this
> >> days a bit out of time.
> >> Thanks for taking the review. I'll try to publish now
> >>
> >> Carlos
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 18:57, Andrew Wetmore ( >)
> >> escribió:
> >>
> >>> I have edited the release. The only thing I would improve, if I could,
> is
> >>> the graphic at the top. The release number appears as "v0.9.6". I am
> >>> pretty
> >>> sure it would be better as "v. 0.9.6", but this is obviously not
> >>> something
> >>> to delay the release for.
> >>>
> >>> Andrew
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 11:56 AM Andrew Wetmore 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Got it! Thanks!
> >>> >
> >>> > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 10:49 AM Carlos Rovira <
> carlosrov...@apache.org
> >>> >
> >>> > wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Yes! that's it :)
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 16:31, Piotr Zarzycki (<
> >>> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
> >>> >> escribió:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> > I think that would be the link:
> >>> >> > https://royale.codeoscopic.com/apache-royale-v0-9-6-released/
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > wt., 8 paź 2019 o 16:29 Andrew Wetmore 
> >>> >> napisał(a):
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > > @Carlos Rovira  where is the draft
> >>> post? I
> >>> >> had
> >>> >> > a
> >>> >> > > hard disk failure this past weekend and am slowly rebuilding my
> >>> >> system.
> >>> >> > > Have to find all my links again.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > a
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 9:48 AM Andrew Wetmore <
> >>> cottag...@gmail.com>
> >>> >> > wrote:
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > > I can do this in a couple of hours
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > > On Tue, Oct 8, 2019, 9:24 AM Carlos Rovira, <
> >>> >> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> >>> >> > > > wrote:
> >>> >> > > >
> >>> >> > > >> Hi Piotr,
> >>> >> > > >>
> >>> >> > > >> I'll wait Andrew's review and then will publish it. If Andrew
> >>> make
> >>> >> his
> >>> >> > > >> changes this afternoon, I can follow up and publish it.
> >>> >> > > >> Then we can post on social networks next or wait to tomorrow
> >>> >> > > >>
> >>> >> > > >>
> >>> >> > > >>
> >>> >> > > >> El mar., 8 oct. 2019 a las 11:21, Piotr Zarzycki (<
> >>> >> > > >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>)
> >>> >> > > >> escribió:
> >>> >> > > >>
> >>> >> > > >> > Just to make sure that you understand why I asked you to
> post
> >>> >> > download
> >>> >> > > >> > links on website along with source code.
> >>> >> > > >> >
> >>> >> > > >> > I will announce on dev, users and announce list - someone
> who
> >>> >> read
> >>> >> > > >> email -
> >>> >> > > >> > will have two options:
> >>> >> > > >> > 1) Can click in that email on royale.apache.org
> >>> >> > > >> > 2) Can download directly binaries or source code from
> >>> provided
> >>> >> links
> >>> >> > > in
> >>> >> > > >> the
> >>> >> > > >> > email
> >>> >> > > >> >
> >>> >> > > >> > If user do #1 he will see old links on website which will
> be
> >>> >> > > >> misleading. -
> >>> >> > > >> > Do you understand now why I asked you to publish stuff
> first
> >>> ?
> >>> >> > > >> >
> >>> >> > > >> > However as I said if you prefer do this in a opposite way
> >>> that's
> >>> >> > fine
> >>> >> > > >> with
> >>> >> > > >> > me. :)
> >>> >> > > >> >
> >>> >> > > >> >
> >>> >> > > >> > wt., 8 paź 2019 o 11:17 Piotr Zarzycki <
> >>> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> >>> >> > > >> > napisał(a):
> >>> >> > > >> >
> >>> >> > > >> > > This is the goal of syncing everything tomorrow. I asked
> >>> you to
> >>> >> > > >> publish
> >>> >> > > >> > > first link and source code on website, cause my announce
> >>> >> probably
> >>> >> > go
> >>> >> > > >> > first
> >>> >> > > >> > > one and I didn't want to mislead with what will be on
> >>> website.
> >>> >> > > >> However if
> >>> >> > > >> > > you wanted to do that differently I'm fine - Couple of
> >>> hours of
> >>> >> > > >> > misleading
> >>> >> > > >> > > doesn't hurts anyone maybe. - We will see tomorrow.
> >>> >> > > >> > >
> >>> >> > > >> > > wt., 8 paź 2019 o 11:05 Carlos Rovira <
> >>> carlosrov...@apache.org
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > > >> > > napisał(a):
> >>> >> > > >> > >
> >>> >> > > >> > >> Hi,
> >>> >> > > >> > >> ok, is normal,
> >>> >> > > >> > >> as people following our dev, are as well using links to
> >>> 0.9.6
> >>> >> > > >> releases.
> >>> >> > > >> > >> The update of links in website is more about to announce
> >>> to
> >>> >> the
> >>> >> > > rest
> >>> >> > > >> of
> >>>

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs #5