Re: State of 0.9.6 release

2019-08-08 Thread Carlos Rovira
Ok Piotr, many thanks for summarizing all. Now all is more clear :)

El jue., 8 ago. 2019 a las 11:30, Piotr Zarzycki ()
escribió:

> Hi Carlos,
>
> I went trough 10 out of 15 steps without too much of a problem and I had to
> drop that stuff for other more urgent tasks. It is the matter of right now
> starting from scratch with latest changes from develop, cause it looks like
> process is quite easy to go trough. I have two issues on me right now more
> urgent than Royale release, once I get rid of them I will be able to get
> back with releasing Royale.
> One of the issue is minification problem which I have posted about.
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> czw., 8 sie 2019 o 11:26 Carlos Rovira 
> napisał(a):
>
> > Hi Piotr,
> >
> > I'm curious about what happen with your try to make the new release. I
> > thought you got it working successfully and was about to create the
> release
> > thread right? Or maybe you found some problem in the process?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> *
>


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


Re: State of 0.9.6 release

2019-08-08 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
Hi Carlos,

I went trough 10 out of 15 steps without too much of a problem and I had to
drop that stuff for other more urgent tasks. It is the matter of right now
starting from scratch with latest changes from develop, cause it looks like
process is quite easy to go trough. I have two issues on me right now more
urgent than Royale release, once I get rid of them I will be able to get
back with releasing Royale.
One of the issue is minification problem which I have posted about.

Thanks,
Piotr

czw., 8 sie 2019 o 11:26 Carlos Rovira  napisał(a):

> Hi Piotr,
>
> I'm curious about what happen with your try to make the new release. I
> thought you got it working successfully and was about to create the release
> thread right? Or maybe you found some problem in the process?
>
> thanks
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>


-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

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


State of 0.9.6 release

2019-08-08 Thread Carlos Rovira
Hi Piotr,

I'm curious about what happen with your try to make the new release. I
thought you got it working successfully and was about to create the release
thread right? Or maybe you found some problem in the process?

thanks

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


Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-23 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
in the project's best interests for others
> to
> >> truly understand
> >> > > how this
> >> > > > stuff works.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > -Alex
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"
> >> 
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > It has turned out to be harder than
> expected to
> >> get the same
> >> > > binaries
> >> > > > on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical
> binaries
> >> for
> >> > > royale-compiler and
> >> > > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am
> starting on
> >> royale-asjs.  I
> >> > > might
> >> > > > get lucky and the changes that fixed
> >> royale-typedefs SWCs will
> >> > > magically
> >> > > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we
> have to
> >> make the Ant
> >> > > artifacts
> >> > > > match.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > There have been a lot of distractions in
> my
> >> non-work life which
> >> > > has
> >> > > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much
> >> progress this coming
> >> > > week and
> >> > > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a
> volunteer
> >> (or volunteers) to
> >> > > test
> >> > > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for
> 0.9.6.  I
> >> am not going to
> >> > > be the
> >> > > > RM.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -Alex
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> >> > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
> >> > > >
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Hi Alex,
> >> > > >
> >> > > > It's been a while since you have
> started
> >> effort with
> >> > > automating
> >> > > > build.
> >> > > > Where are you with that ? Are we
> closer to
> >> started 0.9.6.
> >> > Do
> >> > > you
> >> > > > need any
> >> > > > help with this ?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > Piotr
> >> > > >
> >> > > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
> >> >  >> > > >
> >> > > > napisał(a):
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Update:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > In order to make verification of
> binary
> >> release packages
> >> > > created
> >> > > > on the
> >> > > > > server easier, I have made changes
> to our
> >> build scripts
>     >>     > and
> >> > > > tools to try to
> >> > > > > generate reproducible binaries.
> I've
> >> seen two different
> >> > > builds
> >> > >   

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-23 Thread Alex Harui
;> > > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to
>> make the Ant
>> > > artifacts
>> > > > match.
>> > > >
>> > > > There have been a lot of distractions in my
>> non-work life which
>> > > has
>> > > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much
>> progress this coming
>> > > week and
>> > > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer
>> (or volunteers) to
>> > > test
>> > > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I
>> am not going to
>> > > be the
>> > > > RM.
>> > > >
>> > > > -Alex
>> > > >
>> > > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
>> > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
>> > > >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi Alex,
>> > > >
>> > > > It's been a while since you have started
>> effort with
>> > > automating
>> > > > build.
>> > > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to
>> started 0.9.6.
>> > Do
>> > > you
>> > > > need any
>> > > > help with this ?
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Piotr
>> > > >
>> > > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
>> > > > > >
>> > > > napisał(a):
>> > > >
>> > > > > Update:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > In order to make verification of binary
>> release packages
>> > > created
>> > > > on the
>> > > > > server easier, I have made changes to our
>> build scripts
>> > and
>> > > > tools to try to
>> > > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've
>> seen two different
>> > > builds
>> > > > compare on
>> > > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to
>> see if the server
>> > > can
>> > > > build a
>> > > > > package on Windows that will compare on
>> Mac.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to
    >> JBurg.  The
>> > > version of
>> > > > JBurg we
>> > > > > use generates method names including a
>> hash that doesn't
>> > > > reproduce the same
>> > > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg
>> ready, however
>> > > JBurg is
>> > > > currently
>> > > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only
>> need one file, we
>> > > don't
>> > > > need or
>> > > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one
>> JBurg file is
>> > > jointly
>> > > > owned by
>> > > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom
>> and he will be
>> > > filing
>> > > > an ICLA and
>> > > > > has g

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-23 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
ith that ? Are we closer to
>> started 0.9.6.
>> > Do
>> > > you
>> > > > need any
>> > > > help with this ?
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Piotr
>> > > >
>> > > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
>> > > > > >
>> > > > napisał(a):
>> > > >
>> > > > > Update:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > In order to make verification of binary
>> release packages
>> > > created
>> > > > on the
>> > > > > server easier, I have made changes to our
>> build scripts
>> > and
>> > > > tools to try to
>> > > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've
>> seen two different
>> > > builds
>> > > > compare on
>> > > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to
>> see if the server
>> > > can
>> > > > build a
>> > > >     > package on Windows that will compare on
>> Mac.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to
>> JBurg.  The
>> > > version of
>> > > > JBurg we
>> > > > > use generates method names including a
>> hash that doesn't
>> > > > reproduce the same
>> > > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg
>> ready, however
>> > > JBurg is
>> > > > currently
>> > > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only
>> need one file, we
>> > > don't
>> > > > need or
>> > > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one
>> JBurg file is
>> > > jointly
>> > > > owned by
>> > > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom
>> and he will be
>> > > filing
>> > > > an ICLA and
>> > > > > has given me permission to commit the
>> lines he owns in
>> > > that one
>> > > > file.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > This is the revision of the file that
>> will be donated by
>> > > > Tom/Adobe.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959643335sdata=ZYf5QUAPr%2BNKndH9vr8pI7TeTAWX1hxLMV%2FyKb1U0g4%3Dreserved=0
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Once this file goes in with the changes
>> to keep the
>> > method
>> > > names
>> > > > the same,
>> > > > > there will be more tweaks to the release
>> tasks and then
>> > we
>> > > can
>> > > > try cutting
>> > > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that
>> point in early
>> > > May, so
>> > > > now is the
>> > > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6
>> release.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Thanks,
>> > > >

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-17 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
   > tools to try to
> > > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen
> two different
> > > builds
> > > > compare on
> > > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to
> see if the server
> > > can
> > > > build a
> > > > > package on Windows that will compare on
> Mac.
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to
> JBurg.  The
> > > version of
> > > > JBurg we
> > > > > use generates method names including a
> hash that doesn't
> > > > reproduce the same
> > > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg
> ready, however
> > > JBurg is
> > > > currently
> > >     >     > under CPL which is category B.  We only
> need one file, we
> > > don't
> > > > need or
> > > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one
> JBurg file is
> > > jointly
> > > > owned by
> > > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom
> and he will be
> > > filing
> > > > an ICLA and
> > > > > has given me permission to commit the
> lines he owns in
> > > that one
> > > > file.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the revision of the file that will
> be donated by
> > > > Tom/Adobe.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959643335sdata=ZYf5QUAPr%2BNKndH9vr8pI7TeTAWX1hxLMV%2FyKb1U0g4%3Dreserved=0
> > > > >
> > > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to
> keep the
> > method
> > > names
> > > > the same,
> > > > > there will be more tweaks to the release
> tasks and then
> > we
> > > can
> > > > try cutting
> > > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that
> point in early
> > > May, so
> > > > now is the
> > > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > -Alex
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui" <
> aha...@adobe.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I would much rather have others find
> and fix issues
> > > > themselves.  That
> > > > > way, more people than just me will know
> how to maintain
> > the
> > > > system.  It
> > > > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of
> people can work
> > > on the
> > > > release.
> > > > > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14
> different people could
> > > > execute one step
> > > > > each.
> > > > >
> > > > > My 2 cents,
> > > > > -Alex
> > > > >
> > > > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > &g

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-17 Thread Alex Harui
> > owned by
> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he 
will be
> > filing
> > > an ICLA and
> > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he 
owns in
> > that one
> > > file.
> > >     >
    > > > > This is the revision of the file that will be 
donated by
> > > Tom/Adobe.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959643335sdata=ZYf5QUAPr%2BNKndH9vr8pI7TeTAWX1hxLMV%2FyKb1U0g4%3Dreserved=0
> > > >
> > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep 
the
> method
> > names
> > > the same,
> > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks 
and then
> we
> > can
> > > try cutting
> > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point 
in early
> > May, so
> > > now is the
> > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui" 

> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I would much rather have others find and 
fix issues
> > > themselves.  That
> > > > way, more people than just me will know how to 
maintain
> the
> > > system.  It
> > > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people 
can work
> > on the
> > > release.
> > > > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different 
people could
> > > execute one step
> > > > each.
> > > >
> > > > My 2 cents,
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Alex,
> > > >
> > > > amazing work! congrats to reach to this 
point! :)
> > > >
> > > > I need to put my head on all of this, 
but count
> on
> > me to
> > > be a RM.
> > > > I think
> > > > the best thing should be that you be 
the first RM
> > to try
> > > your own
> > > > development at least for the first 
time, and then
> > the
> > > rest of us
> > > > will
> > > > follow you on the next releases. With 
all this on
> > place
> > > we maybe
> > > > could
> > > > release once a month or every two 
months...
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for doing this :)
> > > >
> > > > Carlos
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex 
Harui
> > > > ()
> > >

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-17 Thread Alex Harui
> > >
> > > There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life 
which
> > has
> > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this 
coming
> > week and
> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or 
volunteers) to
> > test
> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not 
going to
> > be the
> > > RM.
> > >
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > It's been a while since you have started effort with
> > automating
> > > build.
> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 
0.9.6.
> Do
> > you
> > > need any
> > > help with this ?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Piotr
> > >
> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
>  > >
> > > napisał(a):
> > >
> > > > Update:
> > > >
> > > > In order to make verification of binary release 
packages
> > created
> > > on the
> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build 
scripts
> and
> > > tools to try to
> > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two 
different
> > builds
> > > compare on
> > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the 
server
> > can
> > > build a
> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> > > >
> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  
The
> > version of
> > > JBurg we
> > > > use generates method names including a hash that 
doesn't
> > > reproduce the same
> > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, 
however
> > JBurg is
> > > currently
> > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one 
file, we
> > don't
> > > need or
> > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file 
is
> > jointly
> > > owned by
> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he 
will be
> > filing
> > > an ICLA and
> > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns 
in
> > that one
    > > > file.
> > > >
> > > > This is the revision of the file that will be 
donated by
> > > Tom/Adobe.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C3775d449f101420bcf2008d6f335b448%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963809362999395sdata=se%2FwjB7phtYMds4U5ouI4muRMf8eBGxaH0GXcda1r70%3Dreserved=0
> > > >
> > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the
> method
> > names
> > > the same,
> > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and 
then
> we
> > can
> > > try cutting
> > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in 
early
> > May, so
> > > now is the
> > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > &g

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-17 Thread Carlos Rovira
> > because it
> > > > > is in the project's best interests for others to truly
> > understand
> > > > how this
> > > > > stuff works.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > -Alex
> > > > >
> > > > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"  >
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the
> > same
> > > > binaries
> > > > > on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for
> > > > royale-compiler and
> > > > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on
> > royale-asjs.  I
> > > > might
> > > > > get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs
> > will
> > > > magically
> > > > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make
> the
> > Ant
> > > > artifacts
> > > > > match.
> > > > >
> > > > > There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work
> > life which
> > > > has
> > > > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this
> > coming
> > > > week and
> > > > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or
> > volunteers) to
> > > > test
> > > > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not
> > going to
> > > > be the
> > > > > RM.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Alex
> > > > >
> > > > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> > > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Alex,
> > > > >
> > > > > It's been a while since you have started effort
> with
> > > > automating
> > > > > build.
> > > > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started
> > 0.9.6.
> > > Do
> > > > you
> > > > > need any
> > > > > help with this ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Piotr
> > > > >
> > > > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
> > >  > > > >
> > > > > napisał(a):
> > > > >
> > > > > > Update:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In order to make verification of binary release
> > packages
> > > > created
> > > > > on the
> > > > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build
> > scripts
> > > and
> > > > > tools to try to
> > > > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two
> > different
> > > > builds
> > > > > compare on
> > > > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if
> the
> > server
> > > > can
> > > > > build a
> > > > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.
> > The
> > > > version of
> > > > > JBurg we
> > > > > > use generates method names including a hash that
> > doesn't
> > > > > reproduce the same
> > > > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready,
> > however
> > > > JBurg is
> > > > > currently
> > > > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one
> > file, we
> > > > don't
> > > > > need or
> > > > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg
> > file is
> > > > joint

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-17 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
e have been a lot of distractions in my non-work
> life which
> > > has
> > > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this
> coming
> > > week and
> > > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or
> volunteers) to
> > > test
> > > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not
> going to
> > > be the
> > > > RM.
> > > >
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Alex,
> > > >
> > > > It's been a while since you have started effort with
> > > automating
> > > > build.
> > > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started
> 0.9.6.
> > Do
> > > you
> > > > need any
> > > > help with this ?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Piotr
> > > >
> > > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
> >  > > >
> > > > napisał(a):
> > > >
> > > > > Update:
> > > > >
> > > > > In order to make verification of binary release
> packages
> > > created
> > > > on the
> > > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build
> scripts
> > and
> > > > tools to try to
> > > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two
> different
> > > builds
> > > > compare on
> > > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the
> server
> > > can
> > > > build a
> > > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> > > > >
> > > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.
> The
> > > version of
> > > > JBurg we
> > > > > use generates method names including a hash that
> doesn't
> > > > reproduce the same
> > > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready,
> however
> > > JBurg is
>     > > > currently
> > > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one
> file, we
> > > don't
> > > > need or
> > > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg
> file is
> > > jointly
> > > > owned by
> > > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he
> will be
> > > filing
> > > > an ICLA and
> > > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he
> owns in
> > > that one
> > > > file.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the revision of the file that will be
> donated by
> > > > Tom/Adobe.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4fbab457c2f44cd240d908d6f2f7a7c4%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963542822996552sdata=b70CftgUQmkNU%2BaLs8hw4ZcSCxhpoh4oZ%2FhJ9BCFjUQ%3Dreserved=0
> > > > >
> > > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the
> > method
> > > names
> > > > the same,
> > > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and
> then
> > we
> > > can
> > > > try cutting
> > > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in
> early
> > > May, so
> > > > now is the
> > > > > time to 

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-17 Thread Alex Harui
Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > It's been a while since you have started effort with
> > automating
> > > build.
> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6.
> Do
> > you
> > > need any
> > > help with this ?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Piotr
> > >
> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
>  > >
> > > napisał(a):
> > >
> > > > Update:
> > > >
> > > > In order to make verification of binary release packages
> > created
> > > on the
> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts
> and
> > > tools to try to
> > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different
> > builds
> > > compare on
> > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the 
server
> > can
> > > build a
> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> > > >
> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The
> > version of
> > > JBurg we
> > > > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't
> > > reproduce the same
> > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however
> > JBurg is
> > > currently
> > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, 
we
> > don't
> > > need or
> > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is
> > jointly
> > > owned by
> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be
> > filing
> > > an ICLA and
> > >     > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in
> > that one
> > > file.
> > > >
> > > > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by
> > > Tom/Adobe.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4fbab457c2f44cd240d908d6f2f7a7c4%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963542822996552sdata=b70CftgUQmkNU%2BaLs8hw4ZcSCxhpoh4oZ%2FhJ9BCFjUQ%3Dreserved=0
> > > >
> > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the
> method
> > names
> > > the same,
> > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then
> we
> > can
> > > try cutting
> > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early
> > May, so
> > > now is the
> > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I would much rather have others find and fix issues
> > > themselves.  That
> > > > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain
> the
> > > system.  It
> > > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work
> > on the
> > > release.
> > > > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people 
could
> > > execute one step
> > > > each.
> > > >
> > > > My 2 cents,
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > 

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-17 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
nge will be to see if the server
> > can
> > > build a
> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> > > >
> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The
> > version of
> > > JBurg we
> > > > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't
> > > reproduce the same
> > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however
> > JBurg is
> > > currently
> > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, we
> > don't
> > > need or
> > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is
> > jointly
> > > owned by
> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be
> > filing
> > > an ICLA and
> > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in
> > that one
> > > file.
> > > >
> > > > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by
> > > Tom/Adobe.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java
> > > >
> > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the
> method
> > names
> > > the same,
> > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then
> we
> > can
> > > try cutting
> > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early
> > May, so
> > > now is the
> > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I would much rather have others find and fix issues
> > > themselves.  That
> > > > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain
> the
> > > system.  It
> > > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work
> > on the
> > > release.
> > > > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could
> > > execute one step
> > > > each.
> > > >
> > > > My 2 cents,
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Alex,
> > > >
> > > > amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)
> > > >
> > > > I need to put my head on all of this, but count
> on
> > me to
> > > be a RM.
> > > > I think
> > > > the best thing should be that you be the first RM
> > to try
> > > your own
> > > > development at least for the first time, and then
> > the
> > > rest of us
> > > > will
> > > > follow you on the next releases. With all this on
> > place
> > > we maybe
> > > > could
> > > > release once a month or every two months...
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for doing this :)
> > > >
> > > > Carlos
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui
> > > > ()
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > > > OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps to
> > build
> > > the release
> > > > > artifacts.  Folks interested in Docker-izing
> the
> > steps
> > > are
> > > > welcome to look
> > > > > at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on the
> CI
> >  

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-12 Thread Carlos Rovira
ll be
> filing
> > an ICLA and
> > > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in
> that one
> > file.
> > >
> > > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by
> > Tom/Adobe.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java
> > >
> > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method
> names
> > the same,
> > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we
> can
> > try cutting
> > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early
> May, so
> > now is the
> > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> > >
> > > I would much rather have others find and fix issues
> > themselves.  That
> > > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the
> > system.  It
> > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work
> on the
> > release.
> > > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could
> > execute one step
> > > each.
> > >
> > > My 2 cents,
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)
> > >
> > > I need to put my head on all of this, but count on
> me to
> > be a RM.
> > > I think
> > > the best thing should be that you be the first RM
> to try
> > your own
> > > development at least for the first time, and then
> the
> > rest of us
> > > will
> > > follow you on the next releases. With all this on
> place
> > we maybe
> > > could
> > > release once a month or every two months...
> > >
> > > Thanks for doing this :)
> > >
> > > Carlos
> > >
> > >
> > > El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui
> > > ()
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps to
> build
> > the release
> > > > artifacts.  Folks interested in Docker-izing the
> steps
> > are
> > > welcome to look
> > > > at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on the CI
> > server.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://apacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/view/Royale%20Release/
> > > >
> > > > These steps assume that the RM can run the basic
> Maven
> > and Ant
> > > build on
> > > > the RM's computer. I think that's a fair
> requirement
> > since all
> > > of us on the
> > > > PMC need to able to do that to build the RC in
> order
> > to vote on
> > > it.
> > > >  Jenkins does other tasks like run the Maven
> release
> > plugin
> > > steps.
> > > >
> > > > Currently that results in binaries on Jenkins
> that are
> > > downloaded to the
> > > > RM's computer.  These binaries need to be
> verified by
> > the RM
> > > which is the
> > > > next phase I will be starting on now.  The RM
> verifies
> > the bits
> > > and then
> > > > PGP s

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-12 Thread Alex Harui
The merge is complete, and the main builds seem to be successful, except for 
Maven on royale-asjs which was failing before the merge.

I'm still catching up on other things, but I think there are some bugs we need 
to fix before cutting the release?  I think ASDoc may not be fully working?  
What else?

-Alex

On 6/10/19, 11:05 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

Hi Alex,

Many thanks for that! I will try to be RM. I will have some dedicated time
for that. I will wait for your instruction and merge to develop.

Thanks,
Piotr


On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 7:31 PM Alex Harui  wrote:

> Well, that turned out to be much more time-consuming than I expected, but
> we can now create identical release artifacts on Mac and Win.  I am 
hopeful
> this effort will pay off not only now in having other folks generate
> releases, but also in the future if signed binaries become a requirement.
>
> There continues to be a lot of distractions in my life that can cause
> delays, but I hope to merge the release_practice branches into develop 
over
> the next day or two and figure out where in the wiki to document the
> release process.  So, now is the time for one or more people to step up to
> be the RMs for 0.9.6 and help debug and improve the process.
>
> I am going to try very hard not to "own" the process.  If something goes
> wrong, I am going to ask others to try to debug and fix it first because 
it
> is in the project's best interests for others to truly understand how this
> stuff works.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
> It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the same binaries
> on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for royale-compiler and
> royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on royale-asjs.  I might
> get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs will magically
> get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make the Ant artifacts
> match.
>
> There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life which has
> also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this coming week and
> if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or volunteers) to test
> drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not going to be the
> RM.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> It's been a while since you have started effort with automating
> build.
> Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6. Do you
> need any
> help with this ?
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui 
> napisał(a):
>
> > Update:
> >
> > In order to make verification of binary release packages created
> on the
> > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts and
> tools to try to
> > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different builds
> compare on
> > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the server can
> build a
> > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> >
> > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The version of
> JBurg we
> > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't
> reproduce the same
> > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg is
> currently
> > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, we don't
> need or
> > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is jointly
> owned by
> > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be filing
> an ICLA and
> > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in that one
> file.
> >
> > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by
> Tom/Adobe.
> >
> >
> 
https://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java
    >     >
> > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method names
> the same,
> > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can
> try cutting
> > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at th

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-11 Thread Carlos Rovira
t;> > >
> > > > >> > >> >> > > Thanks,
> > > > >> > >> >> > > -Alex
> > > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > > >> > >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"
> > > > >> >  > > > >> > >> >
> > > > >> > >> >> wrote:
> > > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > > >> > >> >> > > It has turned out to be harder than
> expected
> > > to
> > > > >> get
> > > > >> > >> the same
> > > > >> > >> >> binaries
> > > > >> > >> >> > > on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical
> > binaries
> > > > for
> > > > >> > >> >> royale-compiler
> > > > >> > >> >> > and
> > > > >> > >> >> > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am
> starting
> > on
> > > > >> > >> royale-asjs.
> > > > >> > >> >> I might
> > > > >> > >> >> > > get lucky and the changes that fixed
> > > royale-typedefs
> > > > >> SWCs
> > > > >> > >> will
> > > > >> > >> >> magically
> > > > >> > >> >> > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we
> have
> > > to
> > > > >> make
> > > > >> > >> the Ant
> > > > >> > >> >> > artifacts
> > > > >> > >> >> > > match.
> > > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > > >> > >> >> > > There have been a lot of distractions in
> my
> > > > >> non-work
> > > > >> > >> life
> > > > >> > >> >> which has
> > > > >> > >> >> > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much
> > > progress
> > > > >> this
> > > > >> > >> coming
> > > > >> > >> >> week and
> > > > >> > >> >> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a
> volunteer
> > > (or
> > > > >> > >> volunteers)
> > > > >> > >> >> to test
> > > > >> > >> >> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for
> 0.9.6.
> > > I
> > > > am
> > > > >> > not
> > > > >> > >> going
> > > > >> > >> >> to be
> > > > >> > >> >> > the
> > > > >> > >> >> > > RM.
> > > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > > >> > >> >> > > -Alex
> > > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > > >> > >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> > > > >> > >> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> > > > >> > >> >> > > wrote:
> > > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > > >> > >> >> > > Hi Alex,
> > > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > > >> > >> >> > > It's been a while since you have
> started
> > > > >> effort
> > > > >> > >> with
> > > > >> > >> >> automating
> > > > >> > >> >> > > build.
> > > > >> > >> >> > > Where are you with that ? Are we
> closer
> > to
> > > > >> > started
> > > > >> > >> 0.9.6.
> > > > >> > >> >> Do you
> > > > >> > >> >> > > need any
> > > > >> > >> >> > > help with this ?
> > &

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-11 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
t; > we can now create identical release artifacts on
> > Mac
> > > >> and
> > > >> > >> Win.  I
> > > >> > >> >> am
> > > >> > >> >> > hopeful
> > > >> > >> >> > > this effort will pay off not only now in having
> > > other
> > > >> > folks
> > > >> > >> >> generate
> > > >> > >> >> > > releases, but also in the future if signed
> > binaries
> > > >> > become
> > > >> > >> a
> > > >> > >> >> requirement.
> > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > >> > >> >> > > There continues to be a lot of distractions in
> my
> > > life
> > > >> > >> that can
> > > >> > >> >> cause
> > > >> > >> >> > > delays, but I hope to merge the release_practice
> > > >> branches
> > > >> > >> into
> > > >> > >> >> develop
> > > >> > >> >> > over
> > > >> > >> >> > > the next day or two and figure out where in the
> > wiki
> > > >> to
> > > >> > >> document
> > > >> > >> >> the
> > > >> > >> >> > > release process.  So, now is the time for one or
> > > more
> > > >> > >> people to
> > > >> > >> >> step up
> > > >> > >> >> > to
> > > >> > >> >> > > be the RMs for 0.9.6 and help debug and improve
> > the
> > > >> > >> process.
> > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > >> > >> >> > > I am going to try very hard not to "own" the
> > > >> process.  If
> > > >> > >> >> something goes
> > > >> > >> >> > > wrong, I am going to ask others to try to debug
> > and
> > > >> fix
> > > >> > it
> > > >> > >> first
> > > >> > >> >> because
> > > >> > >> >> > it
> > > >> > >> >> > > is in the project's best interests for others to
> > > truly
> > > >> > >> understand
> > > >> > >> >> how
> > > >> > >> >> > this
> > > >> > >> >> > > stuff works.
> > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > >> > >> >> > > Thanks,
> > > >> > >> >> > > -Alex
> > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > >> > >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"
> > > >> >  > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> >> wrote:
> > > >> > >> >> > >
> > > >> > >> >> > > It has turned out to be harder than expected
> > to
> > > >> get
> > > >> > >> the same
> > > >> > >> >> binaries
> > > >> > >> >> > > on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical
> binaries
> > > for
> > > >> > >> >> royale-compiler
> > > >> > >> >> > and
> > > >> > >> >> > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting
> on
> > > >> > >> royale-asjs.
> > > >> > >> >> I might
> > > >> > >> >> > > get lucky and the changes that fixed
> > royale-typedefs
> > > >> SWCs
> > > >> > >> will
> > > >> > >> >> magically
> > > >> > >> >> > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have
> > to
> > > >> make
> > > >> > >> the Ant
> > > >> > >> >> >

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-11 Thread Greg Dove
> > >> > >> >> > over
> > >> > >> >> > > the next day or two and figure out where in the
> wiki
> > >> to
> > >> > >> document
> > >> > >> >> the
> > >> > >> >> > > release process.  So, now is the time for one or
> > more
> > >> > >> people to
> > >> > >> >> step up
> > >> > >> >> > to
> > >> > >> >> > > be the RMs for 0.9.6 and help debug and improve
> the
> > >> > >> process.
> > >> > >> >> > >
> > >> > >> >> > > I am going to try very hard not to "own" the
> > >> process.  If
> > >> > >> >> something goes
> > >> > >> >> > > wrong, I am going to ask others to try to debug
> and
> > >> fix
> > >> > it
> > >> > >> first
> > >> > >> >> because
> > >> > >> >> > it
> > >> > >> >> > > is in the project's best interests for others to
> > truly
> > >> > >> understand
> > >> > >> >> how
> > >> > >> >> > this
> > >> > >> >> > > stuff works.
> > >> > >> >> > >
> > >> > >> >> > > Thanks,
> > >> > >> >> > > -Alex
> > >> > >> >> > >
> > >> > >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"
> > >> >  > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> > >> >> > >
> > >> > >> >> > > It has turned out to be harder than expected
> to
> > >> get
> > >> > >> the same
> > >> > >> >> binaries
> > >> > >> >> > > on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries
> > for
> > >> > >> >> royale-compiler
> > >> > >> >> > and
> > >> > >> >> > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on
> > >> > >> royale-asjs.
> > >> > >> >> I might
> > >> > >> >> > > get lucky and the changes that fixed
> royale-typedefs
> > >> SWCs
> > >> > >> will
> > >> > >> >> magically
> > >> > >> >> > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have
> to
> > >> make
> > >> > >> the Ant
> > >> > >> >> > artifacts
> > >> > >> >> > > match.
> > >> > >> >> > >
> > >> > >> >> > > There have been a lot of distractions in my
> > >> non-work
> > >> > >> life
> > >> > >> >> which has
> > >> > >> >> > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much
> progress
> > >> this
> > >> > >> coming
> > >> > >> >> week and
> > >> > >> >> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer
> (or
> > >> > >> volunteers)
> > >> > >> >> to test
> > >> > >> >> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.
> I
> > am
> > >> > not
> > >> > >> going
> > >> > >> >> to be
> > >> > >> >> > the
> > >> > >> >> > > RM.
> > >> > >> >> > >
> > >> > >> >> > > -Alex
> > >> > >> >> > >
> > >> > >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> > >> > >> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> > >> > >> >> > > w

0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
t; >
> >> > >> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > >> >> > > -Alex
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"
> >> >  >> > >> >
> >> > >> >> wrote:
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > It has turned out to be harder than expected to
> >> get
> >> > >> the same
> >> > >> >> binaries
> >> > >> >> > > on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries
> for
> >> > >> >> royale-compiler
> >> > >> >> > and
> >> > >> >> > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on
> >> > >> royale-asjs.
> >> > >> >> I might
> >> > >> >> > > get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs
> >> SWCs
> >> > >> will
> >> > >> >> magically
> >> > >> >> > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to
> >> make
> >> > >> the Ant
> >> > >> >> > artifacts
> >> > >> >> > > match.
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > There have been a lot of distractions in my
> >> non-work
> >> > >> life
> >> > >> >> which has
> >> > >> >> > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress
> >> this
> >> > >> coming
> >> > >> >> week and
> >> > >> >> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or
> >> > >> volunteers)
> >> > >> >> to test
> >> > >> >> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I
> am
> >> > not
> >> > >> going
> >> > >> >> to be
> >> > >> >> > the
> >> > >> >> > > RM.
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > -Alex
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> >> > >> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> >> > >> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > Hi Alex,
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > It's been a while since you have started
> >> effort
> >> > >> with
> >> > >> >> automating
> >> > >> >> > > build.
> >> > >> >> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to
> >> > started
> >> > >> 0.9.6.
> >> > >> >> Do you
> >> > >> >> > > need any
> >> > >> >> > > help with this ?
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > >> >> > > Piotr
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
> >> > >> >> 
> >> > >> >> > > napisał(a):
> >> > >> >> > >
> >> > >> >> > > > Update:
> >> > >> >> > > >
> >> > >> >> > > > In order to make verification of binary
> >> release
> >> > >> packages
> >> > >> >> > created
> >> > >> >> > > on the
> >> > >> >> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our
> >> build
> >> > >> scripts
> >> > >> >> and
> >

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Greg Dove
> >> the Ant
>> > >> >> > artifacts
>> > >> >> > > match.
>> > >> >> > >
>> > >> >> > > There have been a lot of distractions in my
>> non-work
>> > >> life
>> > >> >> which has
>> > >> >> > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress
>> this
>> > >> coming
>> > >> >> week and
>> > >> >> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or
>> > >> volunteers)
>> > >> >> to test
>> > >> >> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am
>> > not
>> > >> going
>> > >> >> to be
>> > >> >> > the
>> > >> >> > > RM.
>> > >> >> > >
>> > >> >> > > -Alex
>> > >> >> > >
>> > >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
>> > >> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
>> > >> >> > > wrote:
>> > >> >> > >
>> > >> >> > > Hi Alex,
>> > >> >> > >
>> > >> >> > > It's been a while since you have started
>> effort
>> > >> with
>> > >> >> automating
>> > >> >> > > build.
>> > >> >> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to
>> > started
>> > >> 0.9.6.
>> > >> >> Do you
>> > >> >> > > need any
>> > >> >> > > help with this ?
>> > >> >> > >
>> > >> >> > > Thanks,
>> > >> >> > > Piotr
>> > >> >> > >
>> > >> >> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
>> > >> >> 
>> > >> >> > > napisał(a):
>> > >> >> > >
>> > >> >> > > > Update:
>> > >> >> > > >
>> > >> >> > > > In order to make verification of binary
>> release
>> > >> packages
>> > >> >> > created
>> > >> >> > > on the
>> > >> >> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our
>> build
>> > >> scripts
>> > >> >> and
>> > >> >> > > tools to try to
>> > >> >> > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen
>> two
>> > >> >> different builds
>> > >> >> > > compare on
>> > >> >> > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see
>> if
>> > >> the
>> > >> >> server can
>> > >> >> > > build a
>> > >> >> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
>> > >> >> > > >
>> > >> >> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to
>> > >> JBurg.  The
>> > >> >> version
>> > >> >> > of
>> > >> >> > > JBurg we
>> > >> >> > > > use generates method names including a hash
>> > that
>> > >> doesn't
>> > >> >> > > reproduce the same
>> > >> >> > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg
>> ready,
>> > >> however
>> > >> >> JBurg
>> > >> >> > is
>> > >> >> > > currently
>> > >> >> > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need
>> > one
>> > >> file,
>> > >> >> we don't
>> > >> >> > > need or
>> > 

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Greg Dove
  > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> > >> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> > >> >> > > wrote:
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Hi Alex,
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > It's been a while since you have started effort
> > >> with
> > >> >> automating
> > >> >> > > build.
> > >> >> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to
> > started
> > >> 0.9.6.
> > >> >> Do you
> > >> >> > > need any
> > >> >> > > help with this ?
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Thanks,
> > >> >> > > Piotr
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
> > >> >> 
> > >> >> > > napisał(a):
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > > Update:
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > In order to make verification of binary
> release
> > >> packages
> > >> >> > created
> > >> >> > > on the
> > >> >> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our
> build
> > >> scripts
> > >> >> and
> > >> >> > > tools to try to
> > >> >> > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen
> two
> > >> >> different builds
> > >> >> > > compare on
> > >> >> > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see
> if
> > >> the
> > >> >> server can
> > >> >> > > build a
> > >> >> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to
> > >> JBurg.  The
> > >> >> version
> > >> >> > of
> > >> >> > > JBurg we
> > >> >> > > > use generates method names including a hash
> > that
> > >> doesn't
> > >> >> > > reproduce the same
> > >> >> > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg
> ready,
> > >> however
> > >> >> JBurg
> > >> >> > is
> > >> >> > > currently
> > >> >> > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need
> > one
> > >> file,
> > >> >> we don't
> > >> >> > > need or
> > >> >> > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one
> JBurg
> > >> file is
> > >> >> jointly
> > >> >> > > owned by
> > >> >> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and
> he
> > >> will be
> > >> >> filing
> > >> >> > > an ICLA and
> > >> >> > > > has given me permission to commit the lines
> he
> > >> owns in
> > >> >> that one
> > >> >> > > file.
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > This is the revision of the file that will be
> > >> donated by
> > >> >> > > Tom/Adobe.
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5b

0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
only now in having other
> folks
> >> >> generate
> >> >> > > releases, but also in the future if signed binaries
> become
> >> a
> >> >> requirement.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > There continues to be a lot of distractions in my life
> >> that can
> >> >> cause
> >> >> > > delays, but I hope to merge the release_practice branches
> >> into
> >> >> develop
> >> >> > over
> >> >> > > the next day or two and figure out where in the wiki to
> >> document
> >> >> the
> >> >> > > release process.  So, now is the time for one or more
> >> people to
> >> >> step up
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > > be the RMs for 0.9.6 and help debug and improve the
> >> process.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > I am going to try very hard not to "own" the process.  If
> >> >> something goes
> >> >> > > wrong, I am going to ask others to try to debug and fix
> it
> >> first
> >> >> because
> >> >> > it
> >> >> > > is in the project's best interests for others to truly
> >> understand
> >> >> how
> >> >> > this
> >> >> > > stuff works.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Thanks,
> >> >> > > -Alex
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"
>  >> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > It has turned out to be harder than expected to get
> >> the same
> >> >> binaries
> >> >> > > on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for
> >> >> royale-compiler
> >> >> > and
> >> >> > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on
> >> royale-asjs.
> >> >> I might
> >> >> > > get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs
> >> will
> >> >> magically
> >> >> > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make
> >> the Ant
> >> >> > artifacts
> >> >> > > match.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work
> >> life
> >> >> which has
> >> >> > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this
> >> coming
> >> >> week and
> >> >> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or
> >> volunteers)
> >> >> to test
> >> >> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am
> not
> >> going
> >> >> to be
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > > RM.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > -Alex
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> >> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Hi Alex,
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > It's been a while since you have started effort
> >> with
> >> >> automating
> >> >> > > build.
> >> >> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to
> started
> >> 0.9.6.
> >> >> Do you
> >> >> > > need any
> >> >> > > help with this ?
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Thanks,
> >> >> > > Piotr
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
> >> >> 
> >> >>     >

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Greg Dove
gt;> people to
>> >> step up
>> >> > to
>> >> > > be the RMs for 0.9.6 and help debug and improve the
>> process.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > I am going to try very hard not to "own" the process.  If
>> >> something goes
>> >> > > wrong, I am going to ask others to try to debug and fix it
>> first
>> >> because
>> >> > it
>> >> > > is in the project's best interests for others to truly
>> understand
>> >> how
>> >> > this
>> >> > > stuff works.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Thanks,
>> >> > > -Alex
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui" > >
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > It has turned out to be harder than expected to get
>> the same
>> >> binaries
>> >> > > on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for
>> >> royale-compiler
>> >> > and
>> >> > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on
>> royale-asjs.
>> >> I might
>> >> > > get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs
>> will
>> >> magically
>> >> > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make
>> the Ant
>> >> > artifacts
>> >> > > match.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work
>> life
>> >> which has
>> >> > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this
>> coming
>> >> week and
>> >> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or
>> volunteers)
>> >> to test
>> >> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not
>> going
>> >> to be
>> >> > the
>> >> > > RM.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > -Alex
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
>> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Hi Alex,
>> >> > >
>> >> > > It's been a while since you have started effort
>> with
>> >> automating
>> >> > > build.
>> >> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started
>> 0.9.6.
>> >> Do you
>> >> > > need any
>> >> > > help with this ?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Thanks,
>> >> > > Piotr
>> >> > >
>> >> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
>> >> 
>> >> > > napisał(a):
>> >> > >
>> >> > > > Update:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > In order to make verification of binary release
>> packages
>> >> > created
>> >> > > on the
>> >> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build
>> scripts
>> >> and
>> >> > > tools to try to
>> >> > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two
>> >> different builds
>> >> > > compare on
>> >> > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if
>> the
>> >> server can
>> >> > > build a
>> >> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to
>> JBurg.  The
>> >> version
>> >> > of
>> >> > > JBurg we
>> >> 

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Greg Dove
 >> > > Thanks,
> >> > > -Alex
> >> > >
> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"  >
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the
> same
> >> binaries
> >> > > on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for
> >> royale-compiler
> >> > and
> >> > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on
> royale-asjs.
> >> I might
> >> > > get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs
> will
> >> magically
> >> > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make
> the Ant
> >> > artifacts
> >> > > match.
> >> > >
> >> > > There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work
> life
> >> which has
> >> > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this
> coming
> >> week and
> >> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or
> volunteers)
> >> to test
> >> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not
> going
> >> to be
> >> > the
> >> > > RM.
> >> > >
> >> > > -Alex
> >> > >
> >> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > Hi Alex,
> >> > >
> >> > > It's been a while since you have started effort with
> >> automating
> >> > > build.
> >> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started
> 0.9.6.
> >> Do you
> >> > > need any
> >> > > help with this ?
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > > Piotr
> >> > >
> >> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
> >> 
> >> > > napisał(a):
> >> > >
> >> > > > Update:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > In order to make verification of binary release
> packages
> >> > created
> >> > > on the
> >> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build
> scripts
> >> and
> >> > > tools to try to
> >> > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two
> >> different builds
> >> > > compare on
> >> > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the
> >> server can
> >> > > build a
> >> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.
> The
> >> version
> >> > of
> >> > > JBurg we
> >> > > > use generates method names including a hash that
> doesn't
> >> > > reproduce the same
> >> > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready,
> however
> >> JBurg
> >> > is
> >> > > currently
> >> > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one
> file,
> >> we don't
> >> > > need or
> >> > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg
> file is
> >> jointly
> >> > > owned by
> >> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he
> will be
> >> filing
> >> > > an ICLA and
> >> > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he
> owns in
> >> that one
> >> > > file.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > This is the revision of the file that will be
&g

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Alex Harui
> > There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life
>> which has
>> > > also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this coming
>> week and
>> > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or volunteers)
>> to test
>> > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not going
>> to be
>> > the
>> > > RM.
>> > >
>> > > -Alex
>> > >
>> > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <
>> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi Alex,
>> > >
>> > > It's been a while since you have started effort with
>> automating
>> > > build.
>> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6.
>> Do you
>> > > need any
>> > > help with this ?
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Piotr
>> > >
>> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
>> 
>> > > napisał(a):
>> > >
>> > > > Update:
>> > > >
>> > > > In order to make verification of binary release 
packages
>> > created
>> > > on the
>> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts
>> and
>> > > tools to try to
>> > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two
>> different builds
>> > > compare on
>> > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the
>> server can
>> > > build a
>> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
>> > > >
>> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The
>> version
>> > of
>> > > JBurg we
>> > > > use generates method names including a hash that 
doesn't
>> > > reproduce the same
>> > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however
>> JBurg
>> > is
>> > > currently
>> > >     > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file,
>> we don't
>> > > need or
>> > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is
>> jointly
>> > > owned by
>> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be
>> filing
>> > > an ICLA and
>> > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in
>> that one
>> > > file.
>> > > >
>> > > > This is the revision of the file that will be donated 
by
>> > > Tom/Adobe.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5b308b70316a40dd04cd08d6ee19bec0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636958191704021103sdata=VS1za1vOQhtlKlK4Tdgq3ej04OlhFoYfHziyNbgOIN4%3Dreserved=0
>> > > >
>> > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the
>> method
>> > names
>> > > the same,
>> > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then
>> we can
>> > > try cutting
>> > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in
>> early May,
>> > so
>> > > now is the
>> > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > -Alex
>> > > >
>> > > &g

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Greg Dove
;Piotr Zarzycki" <
>> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi Alex,
>> > >
>> > > It's been a while since you have started effort with
>> automating
>> > > build.
>> > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6.
>> Do you
>> > > need any
>> > > help with this ?
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Piotr
>> > >
>> > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui
>> 
>> > > napisał(a):
>> > >
>> > > > Update:
>> > > >
>> > > > In order to make verification of binary release packages
>> > created
>> > > on the
>> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts
>> and
>> > > tools to try to
>> > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two
>> different builds
>> > > compare on
>> > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the
>> server can
>> > > build a
>> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
>> > > >
>> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The
>> version
>> > of
>> > > JBurg we
>> > > > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't
>> > > reproduce the same
>> > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however
>> JBurg
>> > is
>> > > currently
>> > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file,
>> we don't
>> > > need or
>> > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is
>> jointly
>> > > owned by
>> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be
>> filing
>> > > an ICLA and
>> > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in
>> that one
>> > > file.
>> > > >
>> > > > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by
>> > > Tom/Adobe.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> https://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java
>> > > >
>> > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the
>> method
>> > names
>> > > the same,
>> > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then
>> we can
>> > > try cutting
>> > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in
>> early May,
>> > so
>> > > now is the
>> > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > -Alex
>> > > >
>> > > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui" 
>> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I would much rather have others find and fix issues
>> > > themselves.  That
>> > > > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain
>> the
>> > > system.  It
>> > > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can
>> work on the
>> > > release.
>> > > > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people
>> could
>> > > execute one step
>> > > > each.
>> > > >
>> > > > My 2 cents,
>> > > > -Alex
>> > > >
>> > > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
>> > carlosrov...@apache.org>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi Alex,
>> > > >
>> > > > amazing work! congrats to reach to this point!
>> :)

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Greg Dove
 > > >
> > > > In order to make verification of binary release packages
> > created
> > > on the
> > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts
> and
> > > tools to try to
> > > > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different
> builds
> > > compare on
> > > > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the
> server can
> > > build a
> > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> > > >
> > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The
> version
> > of
> > > JBurg we
> > > > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't
> > > reproduce the same
> > > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however
> JBurg
> > is
> > > currently
> > > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file,
> we don't
> > > need or
> > > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is
> jointly
> > > owned by
> > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be
> filing
> > > an ICLA and
> > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in
> that one
> > > file.
> > > >
> > > > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by
> > > Tom/Adobe.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java
> > > >
> > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the
> method
> > names
> > > the same,
> > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then
> we can
> > > try cutting
> > > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early
> May,
> > so
> > > now is the
> > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I would much rather have others find and fix issues
> > > themselves.  That
> > > > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain
> the
> > > system.  It
> > > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work
> on the
> > > release.
> > > > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could
> > > execute one step
> > > > each.
> > > >
> > > > My 2 cents,
> > > > -Alex
> > > >
> > > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Alex,
> > > >
> > > > amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)
> > > >
> > > > I need to put my head on all of this, but count
> on me
> > to
> > > be a RM.
> > > > I think
> > > > the best thing should be that you be the first
> RM to
> > try
> > > your own
> > > > development at least for the first time, and
> then the
> > > rest of us
> > > > will
> > > > follow you on the next releases. With all this
> on place
> > > we maybe
> > > > could
> > > > release once a month or every two months...
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for doing this :)
> > > >
> > > > Carlos
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui
> > > > ()
> > > >

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Alex Harui
ing a hash that doesn't
> > reproduce the same
> > > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg
> is
> > currently
> > > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, we 
don't
> > need or
> > > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is jointly
> > owned by
> > > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be filing
> > an ICLA and
> > > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in that 
one
> > file.
> > >
> >     > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by
> > Tom/Adobe.
> > >
> > >
> >
> 
https://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java
> > >
> > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method
> names
> > the same,
> > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can
> > try cutting
> > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May,
> so
> > now is the
> > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> > >
> > > I would much rather have others find and fix issues
> > themselves.  That
> > > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the
> > system.  It
> > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work on 
the
> > release.
> > > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could
> > execute one step
> > > each.
> > >
> > > My 2 cents,
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)
> > >
> > > I need to put my head on all of this, but count on me
> to
> > be a RM.
> > > I think
> > > the best thing should be that you be the first RM to
> try
> > your own
> > > development at least for the first time, and then the
> > rest of us
> > > will
> > > follow you on the next releases. With all this on 
place
> > we maybe
> > > could
> > > release once a month or every two months...
> > >
> > > Thanks for doing this :)
> > >
> > > Carlos
> > >
> > >
> > > El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui
> > > ()
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps to build
> > the release
> > > > artifacts.  Folks interested in Docker-izing the
> steps
> > are
> > > welcome to look
> > > > at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on the CI
> > server.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> 
http://apacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/view/Royale%20Release/
> > > >
> > > > These steps assume that the RM can run the basic
> Maven
> > and Ant
> > > build on
> > > > the RM's computer. I think that's a fair requirement
> > since all
> > > of us on the
> > > > PMC need to able to do that to build the RC in order
> > to vote on
> > > it.
> > > >  Jenkins does other tasks like run the Maven release
> > plugin
> > > steps.
> > > >
> > > > C

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Greg Dove
ction.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656sdata=XMDpGg0yPP530enC02eH8CQXf66Lsn97FFaqHxJaaio%3Dreserved=0
> > >
> > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method
> names
> > the same,
> > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can
> > try cutting
> > > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May,
> so
> > now is the
> > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> > >
> > > I would much rather have others find and fix issues
> > themselves.  That
> > > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the
> > system.  It
> > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work on the
> > release.
> > > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could
> > execute one step
> > > each.
> > >
> > > My 2 cents,
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)
> > >
> > > I need to put my head on all of this, but count on me
> to
> > be a RM.
> > > I think
> > > the best thing should be that you be the first RM to
> try
> > your own
> > > development at least for the first time, and then the
> > rest of us
> > > will
> > > follow you on the next releases. With all this on place
> > we maybe
> > > could
> > > release once a month or every two months...
> > >
> > > Thanks for doing this :)
> > >
> > > Carlos
> > >
> > >
> > > El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui
> > > ()
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps to build
> > the release
> > > > artifacts.  Folks interested in Docker-izing the
> steps
> > are
> > > welcome to look
> > > > at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on the CI
> > server.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com%3A8080%2Fview%2FRoyale%2520Release%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656sdata=ag8xFP8FhC0ndIumEhlwAKTNImbUy3vLwVGYWiK0a68%3Dreserved=0
> > > >
> > > > These steps assume that the RM can run the basic
> Maven
> > and Ant
> > > build on
> > > > the RM's computer. I think that's a fair requirement
> > since all
> > > of us on the
> > > > PMC need to able to do that to build the RC in order
> > to vote on
> > > it.
> > > >  Jenkins does other tasks like run the Maven release
> > plugin
> > > steps.
> > > >
> > > > Currently that results in binaries on Jenkins that
> are
> > > downloaded to the
> > > > RM's computer.  These binaries need to be verified by
> > the RM
> > > which is the
> > > > next phase I will be starting on now.  The RM
> verifies
> > the bits
> > > and then
> > > > PGP signs them.  And then the bits are uploaded off
> > the RM's
> > > computer to
> > > > Maven Staging or dist.a.o/dev.   If that uploading
> > turns out to
> > > be a point
> > &g

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
Hi Alex,

Many thanks for that! I will try to be RM. I will have some dedicated time
for that. I will wait for your instruction and merge to develop.

Thanks,
Piotr


On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 7:31 PM Alex Harui  wrote:

> Well, that turned out to be much more time-consuming than I expected, but
> we can now create identical release artifacts on Mac and Win.  I am hopeful
> this effort will pay off not only now in having other folks generate
> releases, but also in the future if signed binaries become a requirement.
>
> There continues to be a lot of distractions in my life that can cause
> delays, but I hope to merge the release_practice branches into develop over
> the next day or two and figure out where in the wiki to document the
> release process.  So, now is the time for one or more people to step up to
> be the RMs for 0.9.6 and help debug and improve the process.
>
> I am going to try very hard not to "own" the process.  If something goes
> wrong, I am going to ask others to try to debug and fix it first because it
> is in the project's best interests for others to truly understand how this
> stuff works.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
> It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the same binaries
> on Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for royale-compiler and
> royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on royale-asjs.  I might
> get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs will magically
> get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make the Ant artifacts
> match.
>
> There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life which has
> also impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this coming week and
> if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or volunteers) to test
> drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not going to be the
> RM.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> It's been a while since you have started effort with automating
> build.
> Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6. Do you
> need any
> help with this ?
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui 
> napisał(a):
>
> > Update:
> >
> > In order to make verification of binary release packages created
> on the
> > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts and
> tools to try to
> > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different builds
> compare on
> > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the server can
> build a
> > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> >
> > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The version of
> JBurg we
> > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't
> reproduce the same
> > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg is
> currently
> > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, we don't
> need or
> > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is jointly
> owned by
> > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be filing
> an ICLA and
> > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in that one
> file.
> >
> > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by
> Tom/Adobe.
> >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656sdata=XMDpGg0yPP530enC02eH8CQXf66Lsn97FFaqHxJaaio%3Dreserved=0
> >
> > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method names
> the same,
> > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can
> try cutting
> > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May, so
> now is the
> > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> >
> > I would much rather have others find and fix issues
> themselves.  That
> > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the
> system.  It
> > actually turns out that

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-06-10 Thread Alex Harui
Well, that turned out to be much more time-consuming than I expected, but we 
can now create identical release artifacts on Mac and Win.  I am hopeful this 
effort will pay off not only now in having other folks generate releases, but 
also in the future if signed binaries become a requirement.

There continues to be a lot of distractions in my life that can cause delays, 
but I hope to merge the release_practice branches into develop over the next 
day or two and figure out where in the wiki to document the release process.  
So, now is the time for one or more people to step up to be the RMs for 0.9.6 
and help debug and improve the process.

I am going to try very hard not to "own" the process.  If something goes wrong, 
I am going to ask others to try to debug and fix it first because it is in the 
project's best interests for others to truly understand how this stuff works.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:

It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the same binaries on 
Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for royale-compiler and 
royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on royale-asjs.  I might get 
lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs will magically get the 
royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make the Ant artifacts match.

There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life which has also 
impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this coming week and if we're 
lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or volunteers) to test drive all of 
this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not going to be the RM.

-Alex

On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

Hi Alex,

It's been a while since you have started effort with automating build.
Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6. Do you need 
any
help with this ?

Thanks,
Piotr

wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui  
napisał(a):

> Update:
>
> In order to make verification of binary release packages created on 
the
> server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts and tools to 
try to
> generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different builds 
compare on
> my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the server can build a
> package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
>
> One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The version of 
JBurg we
> use generates method names including a hash that doesn't reproduce 
the same
> name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg is 
currently
> under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, we don't need 
or
> want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is jointly owned 
by
> Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be filing an 
ICLA and
> has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in that one file.
>
> This is the revision of the file that will be donated by Tom/Adobe.
>
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656sdata=XMDpGg0yPP530enC02eH8CQXf66Lsn97FFaqHxJaaio%3Dreserved=0
>
> Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method names the 
same,
> there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can try 
cutting
> a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May, so now 
is the
> time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
> I would much rather have others find and fix issues themselves.  
That
> way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the system.  
It
> actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work on the 
release.
> There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could execute one 
step
> each.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  
wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)
>
> I need to put my head on all of this, but count on me to be a 
RM.
> I think
> the best thing should be that you be the first RM to tr

Royale's Jenkins Server (was Re: 0.9.6 Release)

2019-05-28 Thread Alex Harui
Changing the subject as I don't think it is specific to the release.

The server itself seems to be running.  Maybe you saw it was not running during 
a forced OS upgrade?

I have seen that the agent momentarily goes off-line and then comes back on 
again after a few seconds.  It is annoying, but jobs eventually get run, so I 
have not bothered to investigate.

HTH,
-Alex

On 5/28/19, 5:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

Hi Alex,

What is happen with our Jenkins server - is it switched OFF for purpose ? I
see that it is happen every day. Today I'm not sure how it launch again.

Thanks,
Piotr

czw., 23 maj 2019 o 18:54 Alex Harui  napisał(a):

> It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the same binaries on
> Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for royale-compiler and
> royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on royale-asjs.  I might
> get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs will magically
> get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make the Ant artifacts
> match.
>
> There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life which has also
> impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this coming week and if
> we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or volunteers) to test 
drive
> all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not going to be the RM.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> It's been a while since you have started effort with automating build.
> Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6. Do you need
> any
> help with this ?
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui 
> napisał(a):
>
> > Update:
> >
> > In order to make verification of binary release packages created on
> the
> > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts and tools to
> try to
> > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different builds
> compare on
> > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the server can build 
a
> > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> >
> > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The version of
> JBurg we
> > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't reproduce
> the same
> > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg is
> currently
> > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, we don't need
> or
> > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is jointly owned
> by
> > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be filing an
> ICLA and
> > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in that one 
file.
> >
> > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by Tom/Adobe.
> >
> >
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cbe81e78f1f7a49f52b5208d6e36a43f9%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636946442897729801sdata=d0zcfjhW7DDgwG3Z8wvahl63X3e0ki6bqnH3S2213UI%3Dreserved=0
> >
> > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method names the
> same,
> > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can try
> cutting
> > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May, so now
> is the
> > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> >
> > I would much rather have others find and fix issues themselves.
> That
> > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the system.
> It
> > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work on the
> release.
> > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could execute
> one step
> > each.
> >
> > My 2 cents,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > amazing

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-05-28 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
Hi Alex,

What is happen with our Jenkins server - is it switched OFF for purpose ? I
see that it is happen every day. Today I'm not sure how it launch again.

Thanks,
Piotr

czw., 23 maj 2019 o 18:54 Alex Harui  napisał(a):

> It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the same binaries on
> Mac and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for royale-compiler and
> royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on royale-asjs.  I might
> get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs will magically
> get the royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make the Ant artifacts
> match.
>
> There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life which has also
> impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this coming week and if
> we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or volunteers) to test drive
> all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not going to be the RM.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> It's been a while since you have started effort with automating build.
> Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6. Do you need
> any
> help with this ?
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui 
> napisał(a):
>
> > Update:
> >
> > In order to make verification of binary release packages created on
> the
> > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts and tools to
> try to
> > generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different builds
> compare on
> > my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the server can build a
> > package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
> >
> > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The version of
> JBurg we
> > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't reproduce
> the same
> > name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg is
> currently
> > under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, we don't need
> or
> > want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is jointly owned
> by
> > Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be filing an
> ICLA and
> > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in that one file.
> >
> > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by Tom/Adobe.
> >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C74ccc0a4a31440c0651708d6df9d4326%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942263907528095sdata=1p0EhJm%2Be7CdkNlE5MHMEJ9EoPINgBGKVU6hlE8C0kQ%3Dreserved=0
> >
> > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method names the
> same,
> > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can try
> cutting
> > a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May, so now
> is the
> > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
> >
> > I would much rather have others find and fix issues themselves.
> That
> > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the system.
> It
> > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work on the
> release.
> > There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could execute
> one step
> > each.
> >
> > My 2 cents,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)
> >
> > I need to put my head on all of this, but count on me to be
> a RM.
> > I think
> > the best thing should be that you be the first RM to try
> your own
> > development at least for the first time, and then the rest
> of us
> > will
> > follow you on the next releases. With all this on place we
> maybe
> > could
> > release once a month or every two months...
> >
> > Thanks for doing this :)
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> >
> > El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui
> > ()
> > escribió:
> >
> &

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-05-23 Thread Alex Harui
It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the same binaries on Mac 
and Win.  I now have the identical binaries for royale-compiler and 
royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on royale-asjs.  I might get 
lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs will magically get the 
royale-asjs SWCs to match.  Then we have to make the Ant artifacts match.

There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life which has also 
impeded progress.  I hope to make much progress this coming week and if we're 
lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or volunteers) to test drive all of 
this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6.  I am not going to be the RM.

-Alex

On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

Hi Alex,

It's been a while since you have started effort with automating build.
Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6. Do you need any
help with this ?

Thanks,
Piotr

wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui  napisał(a):

> Update:
>
> In order to make verification of binary release packages created on the
> server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts and tools to try 
to
> generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different builds compare on
> my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the server can build a
> package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
>
> One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The version of JBurg we
> use generates method names including a hash that doesn't reproduce the 
same
> name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg is currently
> under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, we don't need or
> want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is jointly owned by
> Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be filing an ICLA and
> has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in that one file.
>
> This is the revision of the file that will be donated by Tom/Adobe.
>
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.javadata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C74ccc0a4a31440c0651708d6df9d4326%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942263907528095sdata=1p0EhJm%2Be7CdkNlE5MHMEJ9EoPINgBGKVU6hlE8C0kQ%3Dreserved=0
>
> Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method names the same,
> there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can try cutting
> a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May, so now is 
the
> time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
> I would much rather have others find and fix issues themselves.  That
> way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the system.  It
> actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work on the release.
> There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could execute one step
> each.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)
>
> I need to put my head on all of this, but count on me to be a RM.
> I think
> the best thing should be that you be the first RM to try your own
> development at least for the first time, and then the rest of us
> will
> follow you on the next releases. With all this on place we maybe
> could
> release once a month or every two months...
>
> Thanks for doing this :)
>
> Carlos
>
>
> El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui
> ()
> escribió:
>
> > OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps to build the release
> > artifacts.  Folks interested in Docker-izing the steps are
> welcome to look
> > at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on the CI server.
> >
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com%3A8080%2Fview%2FRoyale%2520Release%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C74ccc0a4a31440c0651708d6df9d4326%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942263907528095sdata=OtDqx0O91trBGYlhEimqYdhTiJXhsCw1YRe6uaV9OF8%3Dreserved=0
> >
> > These steps assume that the RM can run the basic Maven and Ant
> build on
 

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-05-23 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
Hi Alex,

It's been a while since you have started effort with automating build.
Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6. Do you need any
help with this ?

Thanks,
Piotr

wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui  napisał(a):

> Update:
>
> In order to make verification of binary release packages created on the
> server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts and tools to try to
> generate reproducible binaries.  I've seen two different builds compare on
> my Mac.   The next challenge will be to see if the server can build a
> package on Windows that will compare on Mac.
>
> One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg.  The version of JBurg we
> use generates method names including a hash that doesn't reproduce the same
> name each time.  I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg is currently
> under CPL which is category B.  We only need one file, we don't need or
> want all of JBurg at this time.  The one JBurg file is jointly owned by
> Adobe and Tom Harwood.  I've contact Tom and he will be filing an ICLA and
> has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in that one file.
>
> This is the revision of the file that will be donated by Tom/Adobe.
>
> https://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java
>
> Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method names the same,
> there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can try cutting
> a release.  I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May, so now is the
> time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
> I would much rather have others find and fix issues themselves.  That
> way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the system.  It
> actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work on the release.
> There are 14 steps.  Literally, 14 different people could execute one step
> each.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :)
>
> I need to put my head on all of this, but count on me to be a RM.
> I think
> the best thing should be that you be the first RM to try your own
> development at least for the first time, and then the rest of us
> will
> follow you on the next releases. With all this on place we maybe
> could
> release once a month or every two months...
>
> Thanks for doing this :)
>
> Carlos
>
>
> El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui
> ()
> escribió:
>
> > OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps to build the release
> > artifacts.  Folks interested in Docker-izing the steps are
> welcome to look
> > at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on the CI server.
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com%3A8080%2Fview%2FRoyale%2520Release%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C46d1fe9de1214422ce9f08d6a3aec4d2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876368352984672sdata=iVyd9X1U0qVPwCk0ZW9xa7YsPp64EgAxgIwljR7VbNs%3Dreserved=0
> >
> > These steps assume that the RM can run the basic Maven and Ant
> build on
> > the RM's computer. I think that's a fair requirement since all
> of us on the
> > PMC need to able to do that to build the RC in order to vote on
> it.
> >  Jenkins does other tasks like run the Maven release plugin
> steps.
> >
> > Currently that results in binaries on Jenkins that are
> downloaded to the
> > RM's computer.  These binaries need to be verified by the RM
> which is the
> > next phase I will be starting on now.  The RM verifies the bits
> and then
> > PGP signs them.  And then the bits are uploaded off the RM's
> computer to
> > Maven Staging or dist.a.o/dev.   If that uploading turns out to
> be a point
> > of failure, we have the option of having Jenkins upload the big
> files and
> > have the RM only upload PGP signature files.  Or finding a way
> for Jenkins
> > to get the signature files from the RM.  The uploads worked fine
> for me,
> > but then again, so did the old script's uploads.
> >
> > Therefore, once I get the binary verification phase completed, I
> think
> > someone other than me should be the RM and try to use these
> steps to
>

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-04-02 Thread Alex Harui
Update:

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

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

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

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

Thanks,
-Alex

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

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

My 2 cents,
-Alex

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

Hi Alex,

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

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

Thanks for doing this :)

Carlos


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

> OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps to build the release
> artifacts.  Folks interested in Docker-izing the steps are welcome to 
look
> at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on the CI server.
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com%3A8080%2Fview%2FRoyale%2520Release%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C46d1fe9de1214422ce9f08d6a3aec4d2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876368352984672sdata=iVyd9X1U0qVPwCk0ZW9xa7YsPp64EgAxgIwljR7VbNs%3Dreserved=0
>
> These steps assume that the RM can run the basic Maven and Ant build 
on
> the RM's computer. I think that's a fair requirement since all of us 
on the
> PMC need to able to do that to build the RC in order to vote on it.
>  Jenkins does other tasks like run the Maven release plugin steps.
>
> Currently that results in binaries on Jenkins that are downloaded to 
the
> RM's computer.  These binaries need to be verified by the RM which is 
the
> next phase I will be starting on now.  The RM verifies the bits and 
then
> PGP signs them.  And then the bits are uploaded off the RM's computer 
to
> Maven Staging or dist.a.o/dev.   If that uploading turns out to be a 
point
> of failure, we have the option of having Jenkins upload the big files 
and
> have the RM only upload PGP signature files.  Or finding a way for 
Jenkins
> to get the signature files from the RM.  The uploads worked fine for 
me,
> but then again, so did the old script's uploads.
>
> Therefore, once I get the binary verification phase completed, I think
> someone other than me should be the RM and try to use these steps to
> generate the release and help debug the process for the next RM.  So,
> please try to carve out some time to be the RM.  One advantage of 
doing
> most of the work on Jenkins is that it frees up my computer to do 
other
> things while Jenkins is cranking away.
>
> I think we're at least a week away from binary verification, maybe 
two, so
> it is time to start thinking about what is going in this release.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 3/7/19, 4:15 PM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:
>
>  

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-03-08 Thread OmPrakash Muppirala
com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C883e07bd09204902f46808d6a3e4d6db%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876600643826579sdata=MrfZhrrkYZSYJnYWXUwF44rBjptBkWgJNMuvdYyoJRQ%3Dreserved=0
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C883e07bd09204902f46808d6a3e4d6db%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876600643826579sdata=eBdEmF%2F4zAEfw0rro0%2B5tfN5tC5aYgds0oeUXDyxSzk%3Dreserved=0
> > > >> <
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C883e07bd09204902f46808d6a3e4d6db%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876600643826579sdata=eBdEmF%2F4zAEfw0rro0%2B5tfN5tC5aYgds0oeUXDyxSzk%3Dreserved=0
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex Harui
> > > 
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO,
> even
> > more
> > > important
> > > >> than Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may
> also
> > > need to run Adobe
> > > >> AIR's adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash
> tests or
> > > replace Flash
> > > >> with AIR.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Thanks,
> > > >> > -Alex
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for
> your
> > > experience with a
> > > >> that! :)
> > > >> >
> > > >> >El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash
> > > Muppirala (<
> > > >> bigosma...@gmail.com>)
> > > >> >escribió:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able
> to run
> > > UI out of docker
> > > >> >> containers.  I never thought of the
> checkintests
> > > when I made the
> > > >> >> suggestion.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed
> out
> > > looks promising.
> > > >> I will
> > > >> >> poke around with it and see if that works
> for us.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Thanks,
> > > >> >> Om
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss
> <
> > > >> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> > > >> >> wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker
> experience
> > > tell us if
> > > >> this [1] is
> > > >> >>> relevant.
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>>
> > > >> >>> [1]
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C883e07bd09204902f46808d6a3e4d6db%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876600643826579sdata=SLiE3Eo9Ts0wX1ZLIil4xp6rLMEdreBPKeTfg%2BOcFM0%3Dreserved=0
>

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-03-08 Thread Alex Harui
  >> control/dashboard.
> >>
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >> On 2/6/19, 11:03 AM, "Harbs"  wrote:
> >>
> >> A quick search turns up this:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C46d1fe9de1214422ce9f08d6a3aec4d2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876368352994681sdata=EbV3MJ0pgO4rtL4b9v6SG439%2F%2FE5NQyynRAN2yYbNKM%3Dreserved=0
> >> <
> >>
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C46d1fe9de1214422ce9f08d6a3aec4d2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876368352994681sdata=EbV3MJ0pgO4rtL4b9v6SG439%2F%2FE5NQyynRAN2yYbNKM%3Dreserved=0
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C46d1fe9de1214422ce9f08d6a3aec4d2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876368352994681sdata=J2%2Bn5aiSLZCbBmiEr72Ww3pS1RLRjm9ywZJBcJTdGKc%3Dreserved=0
> >> <
> >>
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C46d1fe9de1214422ce9f08d6a3aec4d2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876368352994681sdata=J2%2Bn5aiSLZCbBmiEr72Ww3pS1RLRjm9ywZJBcJTdGKc%3Dreserved=0
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C46d1fe9de1214422ce9f08d6a3aec4d2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876368352994681sdata=g5IwXSR7RyPo96uBfRyV80sQ7re7vd46kWBtPFW%2FtRo%3Dreserved=0
> >> <
> >>
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C46d1fe9de1214422ce9f08d6a3aec4d2%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876368352994681sdata=g5IwXSR7RyPo96uBfRyV80sQ7re7vd46kWBtPFW%2FtRo%3Dreserved=0
> >> >
> >>
> >> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex Harui
> 
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO, even more
> important
> >> than Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may also
> need to run Adobe
> >> AIR's adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash tests or
> replace Flash
> >> with AIR.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > -Alex
> >> >
> >> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your
> experience with a
> >> that! :)
> >> >
> >> >El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash
> Muppirala (<
> >> bigosma...@gmail.com>)
> >> >escribió:
> >> >
> >> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run
> UI out of docker
> >> >> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests
> when I made the
> >> >> suggestion.
> >> >>
> >> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out
> looks promising.
> >> I will
    > >> >> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Om
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, 

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-03-08 Thread Alex Harui
>> > -Alex
> > >> >
> > >> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your
> > experience with a
> > >> that! :)
> > >> >
> > >> >    El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash
> > Muppirala (<
> > >> bigosma...@gmail.com>)
> > >> >escribió:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run
> > UI out of docker
> > >> >> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests
> > when I made the
> > >> >> suggestion.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out
> > looks promising.
> > >> I will
> > >> >> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Thanks,
> > >> >> Om
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss <
> > >> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker 
experience
> > tell us if
> > >> this [1] is
> > >> >>> relevant.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> [1]
> > >>
> >
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C883e07bd09204902f46808d6a3e4d6db%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876600643826579sdata=SLiE3Eo9Ts0wX1ZLIil4xp6rLMEdreBPKeTfg%2BOcFM0%3Dreserved=0
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> 
> > >> >>> From: Alex Harui 
> > >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
> > >> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
> > >> >>> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes
> of
> > reading I ran
> > >> into
> > >> >>> this:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.channelfutures.com%2Fopen-source%2Fwhen-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containersdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C883e07bd09204902f46808d6a3e4d6db%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876600643826579sdata=szljJ%2B%2F7a05Bjl2fuyAo2yC1%2FIKxaEpPakCpSvWKlQs%3Dreserved=0
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with
> > graphical
> > >> interfaces".
> > >> >>> If you want Royale to use Docker for releases,
> show
> > that it can
> > >> run
> > >> >>> checkintests with Flash and the Browser.  Then I
> > will look into
> > >> it more.
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> The highest level goal is to make it as easy as
> > possible for
> > >> someone to
> > >>   

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-03-08 Thread OmPrakash Muppirala
  >> control/dashboard.
> > >>
> > >> -Alex
> > >>
> > >> On 2/6/19, 11:03 AM, "Harbs" 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> A quick search turns up this:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=fA7bthRUAGXzqJdmK4raheZMEHQ4qyy3NHXjufAF6jc%3Dreserved=0
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=fA7bthRUAGXzqJdmK4raheZMEHQ4qyy3NHXjufAF6jc%3Dreserved=0
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=QeJ5h98H2ghmY%2BMoGWKVgYaS6OKiv9BY7Cbu%2FRYh9K0%3Dreserved=0
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=QeJ5h98H2ghmY%2BMoGWKVgYaS6OKiv9BY7Cbu%2FRYh9K0%3Dreserved=0
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=pvNt%2B4Spevu9uXaZeX1bV4AKi3p1KVnwND4XZvqlxt0%3Dreserved=0
> > >> <
> > >>
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=pvNt%2B4Spevu9uXaZeX1bV4AKi3p1KVnwND4XZvqlxt0%3Dreserved=0
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex Harui
> > 
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO, even
> more
> > important
> > >> than Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may also
> > need to run Adobe
> > >> AIR's adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash tests or
> > replace Flash
> > >> with AIR.
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks,
> > >> > -Alex
> > >> >
> > >> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> > carlosrov...@apache.org>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your
> > experience with a
> > >> that! :)
> > >> >
> > >> >El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash
> > Muppirala (<
> > >> bigosma...@gmail.com>)
> > >> >escribió:
> > >> >
> > >> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run
> > UI out of docker
> > >> >> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests
> > when I made the
> > >> >> suggestion.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out
> > looks promising.
> > >> I will
> > >> >> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Thanks,
> > >> >> Om
> > >> >>
> > 

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-03-08 Thread Carlos Rovira
7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=QeJ5h98H2ghmY%2BMoGWKVgYaS6OKiv9BY7Cbu%2FRYh9K0%3Dreserved=0
> >> <
> >>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=QeJ5h98H2ghmY%2BMoGWKVgYaS6OKiv9BY7Cbu%2FRYh9K0%3Dreserved=0
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=pvNt%2B4Spevu9uXaZeX1bV4AKi3p1KVnwND4XZvqlxt0%3Dreserved=0
> >> <
> >>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=pvNt%2B4Spevu9uXaZeX1bV4AKi3p1KVnwND4XZvqlxt0%3Dreserved=0
> >> >
> >>
> >> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex Harui
> 
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO, even more
> important
> >> than Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may also
> need to run Adobe
> >> AIR's adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash tests or
> replace Flash
> >> with AIR.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > -Alex
> >> >
> >> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <
> carlosrov...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your
> experience with a
> >> that! :)
> >> >
> >> >El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash
> Muppirala (<
> >> bigosma...@gmail.com>)
> >> >escribió:
> >> >
> >> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run
> UI out of docker
> >> >> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests
> when I made the
> >> >> suggestion.
> >> >>
> >> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out
> looks promising.
> >> I will
> >> >> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >> Om
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss <
> >> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience
> tell us if
> >> this [1] is
> >> >>> relevant.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> [1]
> >>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=O5WCCm7fcFGjaXpoDum5hMAJXl3JWscFMRMywpBAN1w%3Dreserved=0
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 
> >> >>> From: Alex Harui 
> >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
> >> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
> >> >>> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of
> reading I ran
> >> into
> >> >>> this:
> >> >>>
>  

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-03-07 Thread Alex Harui
pevu9uXaZeX1bV4AKi3p1KVnwND4XZvqlxt0%3Dreserved=0
>> >
>>
>> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex Harui 

>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO, even more 
important
>> than Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may also need to 
run Adobe
>> AIR's adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash tests or 
replace Flash
>> with AIR.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > -Alex
>> >
>> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira" 

>> wrote:
>> >
>> >Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your experience 
with a
>> that! :)
>> >
>> >El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash Muppirala (<
>> bigosma...@gmail.com>)
>> >escribió:
>> >
>> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run UI out 
of docker
>> >> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I 
made the
>> >> suggestion.
>> >>
>> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks 
promising.
>> I will
>> >> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Om
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss <
>> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell 
us if
    >> this [1] is
>> >>> relevant.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> [1]
>> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505592396sdata=O5WCCm7fcFGjaXpoDum5hMAJXl3JWscFMRMywpBAN1w%3Dreserved=0
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 
>> >>> From: Alex Harui 
>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
>> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
>> >>> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
>> >>>
>> >>> I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of 
reading I ran
>> into
>> >>> this:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> 
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.channelfutures.com%2Fopen-source%2Fwhen-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containersdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9a4f659f80694687c3cd08d6a35b378d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636876009505602405sdata=bjIQhi1pOBfBd8jQAc0XmbrsWzlDwSqieUiUoSovnIE%3Dreserved=0
>> >>>
>> >>> Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with 
graphical
>> interfaces".
>> >>> If you want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that 
it can
>> run
>> >>> checkintests with Flash and the Browser.  Then I will 
look into
>> it more.
>> >>>
>> >>> The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible 
for
>> someone to
>> >>> volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this 
(Docker,
>> etc) on
>> >>> your computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, 
RMs will
>> have to
>> >>> have Maven installed and maybe Ant, but you should 
already have
>> those
>> >>> installed to be a committer/PMC member.
>> >>>
  

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-03-07 Thread Alex Harui
his on a shared machine is so that new RMs don't 
have
>> to do as much setup.  But then I wonder about the efficiency of 
kicking off
>> that many Docker images.  Jenkins can manage that already.  Does 
Docker
>> have some sort of similar Dashboard or would we use Jenkins to kick 
off
>> Docker steps?  I can't quite picture what is the outermost
>> control/dashboard.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 2/6/19, 11:03 AM, "Harbs"  wrote:
>>
>> A quick search turns up this:
>>
>>
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce58d923805b6466d511a08d68fdbaa66%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854570955237368sdata=SN87cX9SZv9ZvykqF13LyVLpQpzNYOPjJKXZoJiJ0U0%3Dreserved=0
>> <
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce58d923805b6466d511a08d68fdbaa66%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854570955237368sdata=SN87cX9SZv9ZvykqF13LyVLpQpzNYOPjJKXZoJiJ0U0%3Dreserved=0
>> >
>>
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce58d923805b6466d511a08d68fdbaa66%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854570955237368sdata=7fIOx6HMg4gWvlvqkB1K3F3iIFsEoInsqDQ%2BZTaL7h0%3Dreserved=0
>> <
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce58d923805b6466d511a08d68fdbaa66%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854570955247386sdata=z0o2EpQr0OLl8WRIgWFsd4f1l9%2B6d3L5K5wXaH0NWvg%3Dreserved=0
>> >
>>
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce58d923805b6466d511a08d68fdbaa66%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854570955247386sdata=%2Fepy%2Bu37DffUaV%2BduhvEFmKkyY784R%2FTRlC9ra83TqA%3Dreserved=0
>> <
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Ce58d923805b6466d511a08d68fdbaa66%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854570955247386sdata=%2Fepy%2Bu37DffUaV%2BduhvEFmKkyY784R%2FTRlC9ra83TqA%3Dreserved=0
>> >
>>
>> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex Harui 

>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO, even more important
>> than Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may also need to run 
Adobe
>> AIR's adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash tests or replace 
Flash
>> with AIR.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > -Alex
>> >
>> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira" 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your experience 
with a
>> that! :)
>> >
>> >El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash Muppirala (<
>> bigosma...@gmail.com>)
>> >escribió:
>> >
>> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run UI out of 
docker
>> >> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I made 
the
>> >> suggestion.
>> >>
>> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks 
promising.
>> I will
>> >> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Om
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss <
>> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if
>> this [1] is
>> >>> relevant.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> [1]
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protect

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-10 Thread Alex Harui
3 AM, "Harbs"  wrote:
>>
>> A quick search turns up this:
>>
>>
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C792607ae6ff14e1890bf08d68fbee33a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854447358460836sdata=bQYy5hTabKWf%2F7ge%2BmwxojZnsQwo1RyVD1r4V2yYZas%3Dreserved=0
>> <
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C792607ae6ff14e1890bf08d68fbee33a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854447358470845sdata=HwU%2FgPw7U3QwHjy1eK%2Fio%2B%2F9HMdFuMNsBFd%2B958q8Bc%3Dreserved=0
>> >
>>
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C792607ae6ff14e1890bf08d68fbee33a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854447358470845sdata=%2FVJ9oD6KaQRHZlFRXJApo7ti9cjzzBYyJEtzgJfnm6c%3Dreserved=0
>> <
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C792607ae6ff14e1890bf08d68fbee33a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854447358470845sdata=%2FVJ9oD6KaQRHZlFRXJApo7ti9cjzzBYyJEtzgJfnm6c%3Dreserved=0
>> >
>>
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C792607ae6ff14e1890bf08d68fbee33a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854447358470845sdata=7oj3cu8KnB8wRjI075LnShfLCsTyYHpnOnTQtKMT704%3Dreserved=0
>> <
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C792607ae6ff14e1890bf08d68fbee33a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854447358470845sdata=7oj3cu8KnB8wRjI075LnShfLCsTyYHpnOnTQtKMT704%3Dreserved=0
>> >
>>
>> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex Harui 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO, even more important
>> than Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may also need to run 
Adobe
>> AIR's adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash tests or replace Flash
>> with AIR.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > -Alex
>> >
>> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira" 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your experience with a
>> that! :)
>> >
>> >El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash Muppirala (<
>> bigosma...@gmail.com>)
>> >escribió:
>> >
>> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run UI out of 
docker
>> >> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I made the
>> >> suggestion.
>> >>
>> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks promising.
>> I will
>> >> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Om
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss <
>> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>>     >>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if
>> this [1] is
>> >>> relevant.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> [1]
>> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C792607ae6ff14e1890bf08d68fbee33a%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636854447358470845sdata=4gq%2BDCfHpyoSVIVLQdCher0PFZ5NGWn06l%2BxLDTEbXk%3Dreserved=0
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 
>> >>> From: Alex Harui 
>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
>> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
>> >>> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
>> >>>
>> >>> I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran
>> into
>>

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-10 Thread OmPrakash Muppirala
e could probably turn off the Flash tests or replace Flash
>> with AIR.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > -Alex
>> >
>> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira" 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your experience with a
>> that! :)
>> >
>> >El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash Muppirala (<
>> bigosma...@gmail.com>)
>> >escribió:
>> >
>> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run UI out of docker
>> >> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I made the
>> >> suggestion.
>> >>
>> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks promising.
>> I will
>> >> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Om
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss <
>> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>>     >>
>> >>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if
>> this [1] is
>> >>> relevant.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> [1]
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=URxwcqjZjslBTKS2eUxxW6F9GtxrWpvJIEISv9HIEj0%3Dreserved=0
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> 
>> >>> From: Alex Harui 
>> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
>> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
>> >>> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
>> >>>
>> >>> I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran
>> into
>> >>> this:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.channelfutures.com%2Fopen-source%2Fwhen-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containersdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=6UfyKYUY4wJpa%2B9mxm2B4WLW2sFrGFtUrS6YTLWWa7Q%3Dreserved=0
>> >>>
>> >>> Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with graphical
>> interfaces".
>> >>> If you want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that it can
>> run
>> >>> checkintests with Flash and the Browser.  Then I will look into
>> it more.
>> >>>
>> >>> The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible for
>> someone to
>> >>> volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this (Docker,
>> etc) on
>> >>> your computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, RMs will
>> have to
>> >>> have Maven installed and maybe Ant, but you should already have
>> those
>> >>> installed to be a committer/PMC member.
>> >>>
>> >>> That said, a good takeaway from the Docker idea is to try to find
>> a way
>> >> to
>> >>> make an "Image" of whatever we end up with on whatever server we
>> end up
>> >>> using so if the image can be copied and used on other servers.
>> I'm not
>> >>> exactly sure how to do that with Azure, which hosts my CI
>> server.  I will
>> >>> spend a few more minutes researching that.
>> >>>
>> >>> I could not quickly find any way to get a free VM on Azure or AWS
>> that
>> >>> isn't a free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year.  So, unless someone
>> comes
>> >> up
>> >>> with a free server we can use "forever", I'm going to just start
>> with my
>> >>> Azure VM.
>> >>>
>> >>> -Alex
>> >>>
>> >>> On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos Rovira" 
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>Hi.
>> >>>
>> >>>the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:
>> >>>
>>   

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread OmPrakash Muppirala
ing able to run UI out of docker
> >> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I made the
> >> suggestion.
> >>
> >> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks promising.  I
> will
> >> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Om
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss <
> yishayj...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if this
> [1] is
> >>> relevant.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [1]
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=URxwcqjZjslBTKS2eUxxW6F9GtxrWpvJIEISv9HIEj0%3Dreserved=0
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>> From: Alex Harui 
> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
> >>>
> >>> I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran
> into
> >>> this:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.channelfutures.com%2Fopen-source%2Fwhen-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containersdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=6UfyKYUY4wJpa%2B9mxm2B4WLW2sFrGFtUrS6YTLWWa7Q%3Dreserved=0
> >>>
> >>> Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with graphical
> interfaces".
> >>> If you want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that it can run
> >>> checkintests with Flash and the Browser.  Then I will look into it
> more.
> >>>
> >>> The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible for
> someone to
> >>> volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this (Docker,
> etc) on
> >>> your computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, RMs will
> have to
> >>> have Maven installed and maybe Ant, but you should already have
> those
> >>> installed to be a committer/PMC member.
> >>>
> >>> That said, a good takeaway from the Docker idea is to try to find
> a way
> >> to
> >>> make an "Image" of whatever we end up with on whatever server we
> end up
> >>> using so if the image can be copied and used on other servers.
> I'm not
> >>> exactly sure how to do that with Azure, which hosts my CI server.
> I will
> >>> spend a few more minutes researching that.
> >>>
> >>> I could not quickly find any way to get a free VM on Azure or AWS
> that
> >>> isn't a free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year.  So, unless someone
> comes
> >> up
> >>> with a free server we can use "forever", I'm going to just start
> with my
> >>> Azure VM.
> >>>
> >>> -Alex
> >>>
> >>> On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos Rovira" 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Hi.
> >>>
> >>>the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:
> >>>
> >>>1.- As I was reading I was thinking as well on something like
> Docker
> >>> and
> >>>see Om as well thinking on the same. Maybe is the way to this
> with
> >> the
> >>>actual technology. Seems VMs are stepping out a bit this days in
> >> favor
> >>> of
> >>>things like Docker. Maybe the same did Git over Svn, and today
> Svn is
> >>> an
> >>>old remembrance. I must say that I have no experience with
> Docker, so
> >>> doing
> >>>that will require acquire that knowledge, but seems it could be
> worth
> >>> it.
> >>>
> >>>2.- Maybe is not possible, but I want to propose to do this
> work I a
> >>>separate branch, so it could be in parallel to other
&

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread Alex Harui
Again, I don't know anything about Docker, but before we spend a lot of time on 
Docker, I also want to point out that the process to create a release cannot 
really be thought of as "one application".  It will be a series of "steps" to 
run.How many steps depends on whether we think we can isolate enough stuff 
via Docker to be able to run Docker on the RM's computer instead of some shared 
computer.  On a shared computer there will be dozens of steps because the RM 
will need to enter passwords to commit stuff.  On a local computer I guess the 
RM can supply passwords but I think there will be stopping points where the 
Maven artifacts are deployed and the staging repo is closed, and another 
stopping point for the vote.  It seems like Docker works by downloading 
dependencies.  Given that the problem the RMs had last time involved downloads 
and uploads, why do we think Docker will really solve this for creating 
releases on local machines?

The reason to do this on a shared machine is so that new RMs don't have to do 
as much setup.  But then I wonder about the efficiency of kicking off that many 
Docker images.  Jenkins can manage that already.  Does Docker have some sort of 
similar Dashboard or would we use Jenkins to kick off Docker steps?  I can't 
quite picture what is the outermost control/dashboard.

-Alex

On 2/6/19, 11:03 AM, "Harbs"  wrote:

A quick search turns up this:


https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=5wwLQFM5nPZtALgsrzdXKMxbBxyenWFhU9EBUojLB5M%3Dreserved=0
 
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testingdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=5wwLQFM5nPZtALgsrzdXKMxbBxyenWFhU9EBUojLB5M%3Dreserved=0>

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=2iGtMmdkiH57E2U6SZZ7t7t%2BoyetJ69pMYVmb%2BzO8og%3Dreserved=0
 
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-dockerdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=2iGtMmdkiH57E2U6SZZ7t7t%2BoyetJ69pMYVmb%2BzO8og%3Dreserved=0>

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=XwBOh%2FrpNch5DRWwFCOnYmkJ9EGFumxBuYR9EF7EfTU%3Dreserved=0
 
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-seleniumdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=XwBOh%2FrpNch5DRWwFCOnYmkJ9EGFumxBuYR9EF7EfTU%3Dreserved=0>

> On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:
> 
> Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO, even more important than 
Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may also need to run Adobe AIR's 
adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash tests or replace Flash with AIR.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Alex
> 
> On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
> 
>Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your experience with a that! :)
> 
>El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash Muppirala 
()
>escribió:
> 
>> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run UI out of docker
>> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I made the
>> suggestion.
>> 
>> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks promising.  I will
>> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Om
>> 
>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if this [1] 
is
>>> relevant.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [1] 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7ef1e328bfba4963adc108d68c65c25d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850766018892700sdata=URxwcqjZjslBTKS2eUxxW6F9GtxrWpvJIEISv9HIE

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread Harbs
A quick search turns up this:

https://codingsans.com/blog/selenium-with-docker-testing 
<https://codingsans.com/blog/selenium-with-docker-testing>
https://www.blazemeter.com/blog/how-to-run-selenium-tests-in-docker 
<https://www.blazemeter.com/blog/how-to-run-selenium-tests-in-docker>
https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/docker-selenium 
<https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/docker-selenium>

> On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:
> 
> Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO, even more important than 
> Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may also need to run Adobe AIR's 
> adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash tests or replace Flash with AIR.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Alex
> 
> On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
> 
>Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your experience with a that! :)
> 
>El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash Muppirala 
> ()
>escribió:
> 
>> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run UI out of docker
>> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I made the
>> suggestion.
>> 
>> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks promising.  I will
>> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Om
>> 
>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if this [1] is
>>> relevant.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> [1] 
>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b6fabe26f1a4300616808d68c647e10%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850760589907404sdata=6mIWHg4PFkyEG2nUPdjtjnYkkbmK%2BLAFx%2Fev7%2Fxe3Lw%3Dreserved=0
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From: Alex Harui 
>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
>>> To: dev@royale.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
>>> 
>>> I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran into
>>> this:
>>> 
>>> 
>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.channelfutures.com%2Fopen-source%2Fwhen-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containersdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b6fabe26f1a4300616808d68c647e10%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850760589907404sdata=V9iwab%2FNowIVB7lXCQfj1vAPNObehQZ%2FzRL6Rp%2FKsBA%3Dreserved=0
>>> 
>>> Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with graphical interfaces".
>>> If you want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that it can run
>>> checkintests with Flash and the Browser.  Then I will look into it more.
>>> 
>>> The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible for someone to
>>> volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this (Docker, etc) on
>>> your computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, RMs will have to
>>> have Maven installed and maybe Ant, but you should already have those
>>> installed to be a committer/PMC member.
>>> 
>>> That said, a good takeaway from the Docker idea is to try to find a way
>> to
>>> make an "Image" of whatever we end up with on whatever server we end up
>>> using so if the image can be copied and used on other servers.  I'm not
>>> exactly sure how to do that with Azure, which hosts my CI server.  I will
>>> spend a few more minutes researching that.
>>> 
>>> I could not quickly find any way to get a free VM on Azure or AWS that
>>> isn't a free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year.  So, unless someone comes
>> up
>>> with a free server we can use "forever", I'm going to just start with my
>>> Azure VM.
>>> 
>>> -Alex
>>> 
>>> On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
>>> 
>>>Hi.
>>> 
>>>the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:
>>> 
>>>1.- As I was reading I was thinking as well on something like Docker
>>> and
>>>see Om as well thinking on the same. Maybe is the way to this with
>> the
>>>actual technology. Seems VMs are stepping out a bit this days in
>> favor
>>> of
>>>things like Docker. Maybe the same did Git over Svn, and today Svn is
>>> an
>>>old remembrance. I must say that I have no experience with Docker, so
>>> doing
>>>that will require acquire that knowledge, but seems it

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread Alex Harui
Thanks for volunteering to try it Om.  IMO, even more important than 
Firefox+Flash is SomeBrowser+Selenium.  We may also need to run Adobe AIR's 
adb.  We could probably turn off the Flash tests or replace Flash with AIR.

Thanks,
-Alex

On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:

Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your experience with a that! :)

El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash Muppirala 
()
escribió:

> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run UI out of docker
> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I made the
> suggestion.
>
> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks promising.  I will
> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss 
> wrote:
>
> > I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if this [1] 
is
> > relevant.
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2Fdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b6fabe26f1a4300616808d68c647e10%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850760589907404sdata=6mIWHg4PFkyEG2nUPdjtjnYkkbmK%2BLAFx%2Fev7%2Fxe3Lw%3Dreserved=0
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> > From: Alex Harui 
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
> > To: dev@royale.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
> >
> > I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran into
> > this:
> >
> >
> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.channelfutures.com%2Fopen-source%2Fwhen-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containersdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C6b6fabe26f1a4300616808d68c647e10%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850760589907404sdata=V9iwab%2FNowIVB7lXCQfj1vAPNObehQZ%2FzRL6Rp%2FKsBA%3Dreserved=0
> >
> > Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with graphical interfaces".
> > If you want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that it can run
> > checkintests with Flash and the Browser.  Then I will look into it more.
> >
> > The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible for someone to
> > volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this (Docker, etc) 
on
> > your computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, RMs will have 
to
> > have Maven installed and maybe Ant, but you should already have those
> > installed to be a committer/PMC member.
> >
> > That said, a good takeaway from the Docker idea is to try to find a way
> to
> > make an "Image" of whatever we end up with on whatever server we end up
> > using so if the image can be copied and used on other servers.  I'm not
> > exactly sure how to do that with Azure, which hosts my CI server.  I 
will
> > spend a few more minutes researching that.
> >
> > I could not quickly find any way to get a free VM on Azure or AWS that
> > isn't a free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year.  So, unless someone comes
> up
> > with a free server we can use "forever", I'm going to just start with my
> > Azure VM.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:
> >
> > 1.- As I was reading I was thinking as well on something like Docker
> > and
> > see Om as well thinking on the same. Maybe is the way to this with
> the
> > actual technology. Seems VMs are stepping out a bit this days in
> favor
> > of
> > things like Docker. Maybe the same did Git over Svn, and today Svn 
is
> > an
> > old remembrance. I must say that I have no experience with Docker, 
so
> > doing
> > that will require acquire that knowledge, but seems it could be 
worth
> > it.
> >
> > 2.- Maybe is not possible, but I want to propose to do this work I a
> > separate branch, so it could be in parallel to other developments. I
> > think
> > work over develop is practical if there's something tiny that could
> be
> > done
> > in a commit. But as we need more than one, or is a long process 
(like
> >

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread Carlos Rovira
Hi Om, that would be great! waiting for your experience with a that! :)

El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las 19:31, OmPrakash Muppirala ()
escribió:

> Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run UI out of docker
> containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I made the
> suggestion.
>
> The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks promising.  I will
> poke around with it and see if that works for us.
>
> Thanks,
> Om
>
> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss 
> wrote:
>
> > I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if this [1] is
> > relevant.
> >
> >
> >
> > [1] https://hub.docker.com/r/beli/firefox-flash/
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> > From: Alex Harui 
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
> > To: dev@royale.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
> >
> > I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran into
> > this:
> >
> >
> https://www.channelfutures.com/open-source/when-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containers
> >
> > Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with graphical interfaces".
> > If you want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that it can run
> > checkintests with Flash and the Browser.  Then I will look into it more.
> >
> > The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible for someone to
> > volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this (Docker, etc) on
> > your computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, RMs will have to
> > have Maven installed and maybe Ant, but you should already have those
> > installed to be a committer/PMC member.
> >
> > That said, a good takeaway from the Docker idea is to try to find a way
> to
> > make an "Image" of whatever we end up with on whatever server we end up
> > using so if the image can be copied and used on other servers.  I'm not
> > exactly sure how to do that with Azure, which hosts my CI server.  I will
> > spend a few more minutes researching that.
> >
> > I could not quickly find any way to get a free VM on Azure or AWS that
> > isn't a free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year.  So, unless someone comes
> up
> > with a free server we can use "forever", I'm going to just start with my
> > Azure VM.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:
> >
> > 1.- As I was reading I was thinking as well on something like Docker
> > and
> > see Om as well thinking on the same. Maybe is the way to this with
> the
> > actual technology. Seems VMs are stepping out a bit this days in
> favor
> > of
> > things like Docker. Maybe the same did Git over Svn, and today Svn is
> > an
> > old remembrance. I must say that I have no experience with Docker, so
> > doing
> > that will require acquire that knowledge, but seems it could be worth
> > it.
> >
> > 2.- Maybe is not possible, but I want to propose to do this work I a
> > separate branch, so it could be in parallel to other developments. I
> > think
> > work over develop is practical if there's something tiny that could
> be
> > done
> > in a commit. But as we need more than one, or is a long process (like
> > this), chances are to make develop branch unstable and even for some
> > days.
> > I think we should try to avoid that scenario, and branches are the
> best
> > way. If we do this way, we'll benefit of more reliable develop
> branch.
> >
> > Thanks and good to know of this plan :)
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> >
> > El mar., 5 feb. 2019 a las 23:19, Harbs ()
> > escribió:
> >
> > > I’ve never used Docker myself, but that might be a good plan.
> > >
> > > > On Feb 6, 2019, at 12:07 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
> > bigosma...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was wondering if we can use docker images to setup and seal the
> > RM
> > > > environment.  Then other RMs simply need to run the image locally
> > and run
> > > > the release scripts.  Might be easier.  If folks like this plan,
> I
> > can
> > > try
> > > > to put something together.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Om
>

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread OmPrakash Muppirala
Yes, I agree with Alex about not being able to run UI out of docker
containers.  I never thought of the checkintests when I made the
suggestion.

The firefox-flash image that Yishay pointed out looks promising.  I will
poke around with it and see if that works for us.

Thanks,
Om

On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM Yishay Weiss  wrote:

> I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if this [1] is
> relevant.
>
>
>
> [1] https://hub.docker.com/r/beli/firefox-flash/
>
>
>
> 
> From: Alex Harui 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
> To: dev@royale.apache.org
> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release
>
> I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran into
> this:
>
> https://www.channelfutures.com/open-source/when-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containers
>
> Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with graphical interfaces".
> If you want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that it can run
> checkintests with Flash and the Browser.  Then I will look into it more.
>
> The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible for someone to
> volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this (Docker, etc) on
> your computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, RMs will have to
> have Maven installed and maybe Ant, but you should already have those
> installed to be a committer/PMC member.
>
> That said, a good takeaway from the Docker idea is to try to find a way to
> make an "Image" of whatever we end up with on whatever server we end up
> using so if the image can be copied and used on other servers.  I'm not
> exactly sure how to do that with Azure, which hosts my CI server.  I will
> spend a few more minutes researching that.
>
> I could not quickly find any way to get a free VM on Azure or AWS that
> isn't a free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year.  So, unless someone comes up
> with a free server we can use "forever", I'm going to just start with my
> Azure VM.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:
>
> 1.- As I was reading I was thinking as well on something like Docker
> and
> see Om as well thinking on the same. Maybe is the way to this with the
> actual technology. Seems VMs are stepping out a bit this days in favor
> of
> things like Docker. Maybe the same did Git over Svn, and today Svn is
> an
> old remembrance. I must say that I have no experience with Docker, so
> doing
> that will require acquire that knowledge, but seems it could be worth
> it.
>
> 2.- Maybe is not possible, but I want to propose to do this work I a
> separate branch, so it could be in parallel to other developments. I
> think
> work over develop is practical if there's something tiny that could be
> done
> in a commit. But as we need more than one, or is a long process (like
> this), chances are to make develop branch unstable and even for some
> days.
> I think we should try to avoid that scenario, and branches are the best
> way. If we do this way, we'll benefit of more reliable develop branch.
>
> Thanks and good to know of this plan :)
>
> Carlos
>
>
> El mar., 5 feb. 2019 a las 23:19, Harbs ()
> escribió:
>
> > I’ve never used Docker myself, but that might be a good plan.
> >
> > > On Feb 6, 2019, at 12:07 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala <
> bigosma...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I was wondering if we can use docker images to setup and seal the
> RM
> > > environment.  Then other RMs simply need to run the image locally
> and run
> > > the release scripts.  Might be easier.  If folks like this plan, I
> can
> > try
> > > to put something together.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Om
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:40 PM Harbs 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> In a recent discussion, it looks like other projects have gotten
> > resources
> > >> from AWS.
> > >>
> > >> Whatever service we use, could setup a “shared” Royale account
> that all
> > >> PMC members could have access to.
> > >>
> > >> I don’t know if there’s some way we could leverage Gitlab’s
> integration
> > >> pipelines
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.gitlab.com%2Fee%2Fci%2FREADME.htmldata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cef2b34e531b

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread Justin Mclean
Hi,

If you want to go down this path as far as the ASF is concerned you need to 
comply with [1] and [2]. There’s been some recent conversations on legal dicuss 
and the incubator list about making releases available on these platforms that 
you may also want to pay attention to.

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#what
2. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-270

RE: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread Yishay Weiss
I’ll let Om or someone else with docker experience tell us if this [1] is 
relevant.



[1] https://hub.docker.com/r/beli/firefox-flash/




From: Alex Harui 
Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 10:05:54 AM
To: dev@royale.apache.org
Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release

I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran into this:
https://www.channelfutures.com/open-source/when-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containers

Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with graphical interfaces".  If you 
want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that it can run checkintests with 
Flash and the Browser.  Then I will look into it more.

The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible for someone to 
volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this (Docker, etc) on your 
computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, RMs will have to have Maven 
installed and maybe Ant, but you should already have those installed to be a 
committer/PMC member.

That said, a good takeaway from the Docker idea is to try to find a way to make 
an "Image" of whatever we end up with on whatever server we end up using so if 
the image can be copied and used on other servers.  I'm not exactly sure how to 
do that with Azure, which hosts my CI server.  I will spend a few more minutes 
researching that.

I could not quickly find any way to get a free VM on Azure or AWS that isn't a 
free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year.  So, unless someone comes up with a free 
server we can use "forever", I'm going to just start with my Azure VM.

-Alex

On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:

Hi.

the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:

1.- As I was reading I was thinking as well on something like Docker and
see Om as well thinking on the same. Maybe is the way to this with the
actual technology. Seems VMs are stepping out a bit this days in favor of
things like Docker. Maybe the same did Git over Svn, and today Svn is an
old remembrance. I must say that I have no experience with Docker, so doing
that will require acquire that knowledge, but seems it could be worth it.

2.- Maybe is not possible, but I want to propose to do this work I a
separate branch, so it could be in parallel to other developments. I think
work over develop is practical if there's something tiny that could be done
in a commit. But as we need more than one, or is a long process (like
this), chances are to make develop branch unstable and even for some days.
I think we should try to avoid that scenario, and branches are the best
way. If we do this way, we'll benefit of more reliable develop branch.

Thanks and good to know of this plan :)

Carlos


El mar., 5 feb. 2019 a las 23:19, Harbs () escribió:

> I’ve never used Docker myself, but that might be a good plan.
>
> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 12:07 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
> wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering if we can use docker images to setup and seal the RM
> > environment.  Then other RMs simply need to run the image locally and 
run
> > the release scripts.  Might be easier.  If folks like this plan, I can
> try
> > to put something together.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Om
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:40 PM Harbs  wrote:
> >
> >> In a recent discussion, it looks like other projects have gotten
> resources
> >> from AWS.
> >>
> >> Whatever service we use, could setup a “shared” Royale account that all
> >> PMC members could have access to.
> >>
> >> I don’t know if there’s some way we could leverage Gitlab’s integration
> >> pipelines 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.gitlab.com%2Fee%2Fci%2FREADME.htmldata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cef2b34e531be41983c1208d68c009d75%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850331599744364sdata=ux3NQZcnILfobRoGhlxI509Z30JI2Tba4O%2FDxWFii9w%3Dreserved=0
 <
> >> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.gitlab.com%2Fee%2Fci%2FREADME.htmldata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cef2b34e531be41983c1208d68c009d75%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850331599744364sdata=ux3NQZcnILfobRoGhlxI509Z30JI2Tba4O%2FDxWFii9w%3Dreserved=0>
> >>
> >>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Alex Harui 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Well, the big hole in this plan is that I think we have to use
> someone's
> >> personal VM account (in this case, mine).  I can't think of a way we 
can
> >> run interactive commands like git push on builds@.  But that remind

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread Alex Harui
Looks like we can copy an "image" from Azure.

https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-machines/windows/download-vhd

-Alex

On 2/6/19, 12:06 AM, "Alex Harui"  wrote:

I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran into this:

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.channelfutures.com%2Fopen-source%2Fwhen-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containersdata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C01d2594a5d1e4191a88d08d68c09f2ff%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850371723585790sdata=8i73omHW3ocdJWUx1buo4GrHk9r3JFRystaMgJHfkdU%3Dreserved=0

Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with graphical interfaces".  If 
you want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that it can run checkintests 
with Flash and the Browser.  Then I will look into it more.

The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible for someone to 
volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this (Docker, etc) on your 
computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, RMs will have to have Maven 
installed and maybe Ant, but you should already have those installed to be a 
committer/PMC member.

That said, a good takeaway from the Docker idea is to try to find a way to 
make an "Image" of whatever we end up with on whatever server we end up using 
so if the image can be copied and used on other servers.  I'm not exactly sure 
how to do that with Azure, which hosts my CI server.  I will spend a few more 
minutes researching that.

I could not quickly find any way to get a free VM on Azure or AWS that 
isn't a free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year.  So, unless someone comes up with 
a free server we can use "forever", I'm going to just start with my Azure VM.

-Alex

On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:

Hi.

the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:

1.- As I was reading I was thinking as well on something like Docker and
see Om as well thinking on the same. Maybe is the way to this with the
actual technology. Seems VMs are stepping out a bit this days in favor 
of
things like Docker. Maybe the same did Git over Svn, and today Svn is an
old remembrance. I must say that I have no experience with Docker, so 
doing
that will require acquire that knowledge, but seems it could be worth 
it.

2.- Maybe is not possible, but I want to propose to do this work I a
separate branch, so it could be in parallel to other developments. I 
think
work over develop is practical if there's something tiny that could be 
done
in a commit. But as we need more than one, or is a long process (like
this), chances are to make develop branch unstable and even for some 
days.
I think we should try to avoid that scenario, and branches are the best
way. If we do this way, we'll benefit of more reliable develop branch.

Thanks and good to know of this plan :)

Carlos


El mar., 5 feb. 2019 a las 23:19, Harbs () 
escribió:

> I’ve never used Docker myself, but that might be a good plan.
>
> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 12:07 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala 

> wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering if we can use docker images to setup and seal the RM
> > environment.  Then other RMs simply need to run the image locally 
and run
> > the release scripts.  Might be easier.  If folks like this plan, I 
can
> try
> > to put something together.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Om
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:40 PM Harbs  wrote:
> >
> >> In a recent discussion, it looks like other projects have gotten
> resources
> >> from AWS.
> >>
> >> Whatever service we use, could setup a “shared” Royale account 
that all
> >> PMC members could have access to.
> >>
> >> I don’t know if there’s some way we could leverage Gitlab’s 
integration
> >> pipelines 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.gitlab.com%2Fee%2Fci%2FREADME.htmldata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C01d2594a5d1e4191a88d08d68c09f2ff%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850371723585790sdata=7OZKq43ulwUOLvSabHnm%2FP9FBuMkqBrZABDLsP8IUwc%3Dreserved=0
 <
> >> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.gitlab.com%2Fee%2Fci%2FREADME.htmldata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C01d2594a5d1e4191a88d08d68c09f2ff%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850371723585790sdata=7OZKq43ulwUOLvSabHnm%2FP9FBuMkqBrZABDLsP8IUwc%3Dreserved=0>
> >>
> >>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Alex Harui 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Well, the big hole in this plan is that I think we have to use

Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread Alex Harui
I don't anything about docker, but in 15 minutes of reading I ran into this:
https://www.channelfutures.com/open-source/when-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containers

Which says: Docker can't " Run applications with graphical interfaces".  If you 
want Royale to use Docker for releases, show that it can run checkintests with 
Flash and the Browser.  Then I will look into it more.

The highest level goal is to make it as easy as possible for someone to 
volunteer to be an RM.  Any requirement of "install this (Docker, etc) on your 
computer" is, IMO, another barrier to entry.  Yeah, RMs will have to have Maven 
installed and maybe Ant, but you should already have those installed to be a 
committer/PMC member.

That said, a good takeaway from the Docker idea is to try to find a way to make 
an "Image" of whatever we end up with on whatever server we end up using so if 
the image can be copied and used on other servers.  I'm not exactly sure how to 
do that with Azure, which hosts my CI server.  I will spend a few more minutes 
researching that.

I could not quickly find any way to get a free VM on Azure or AWS that isn't a 
free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year.  So, unless someone comes up with a free 
server we can use "forever", I'm going to just start with my Azure VM.

-Alex

On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos Rovira"  wrote:

Hi.

the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:

1.- As I was reading I was thinking as well on something like Docker and
see Om as well thinking on the same. Maybe is the way to this with the
actual technology. Seems VMs are stepping out a bit this days in favor of
things like Docker. Maybe the same did Git over Svn, and today Svn is an
old remembrance. I must say that I have no experience with Docker, so doing
that will require acquire that knowledge, but seems it could be worth it.

2.- Maybe is not possible, but I want to propose to do this work I a
separate branch, so it could be in parallel to other developments. I think
work over develop is practical if there's something tiny that could be done
in a commit. But as we need more than one, or is a long process (like
this), chances are to make develop branch unstable and even for some days.
I think we should try to avoid that scenario, and branches are the best
way. If we do this way, we'll benefit of more reliable develop branch.

Thanks and good to know of this plan :)

Carlos


El mar., 5 feb. 2019 a las 23:19, Harbs () escribió:

> I’ve never used Docker myself, but that might be a good plan.
>
> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 12:07 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
> wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering if we can use docker images to setup and seal the RM
> > environment.  Then other RMs simply need to run the image locally and 
run
> > the release scripts.  Might be easier.  If folks like this plan, I can
> try
> > to put something together.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Om
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:40 PM Harbs  wrote:
> >
> >> In a recent discussion, it looks like other projects have gotten
> resources
> >> from AWS.
> >>
> >> Whatever service we use, could setup a “shared” Royale account that all
> >> PMC members could have access to.
> >>
> >> I don’t know if there’s some way we could leverage Gitlab’s integration
> >> pipelines 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.gitlab.com%2Fee%2Fci%2FREADME.htmldata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cef2b34e531be41983c1208d68c009d75%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850331599744364sdata=ux3NQZcnILfobRoGhlxI509Z30JI2Tba4O%2FDxWFii9w%3Dreserved=0
 <
> >> 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.gitlab.com%2Fee%2Fci%2FREADME.htmldata=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cef2b34e531be41983c1208d68c009d75%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636850331599744364sdata=ux3NQZcnILfobRoGhlxI509Z30JI2Tba4O%2FDxWFii9w%3Dreserved=0>
> >>
> >>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Alex Harui 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Well, the big hole in this plan is that I think we have to use
> someone's
> >> personal VM account (in this case, mine).  I can't think of a way we 
can
> >> run interactive commands like git push on builds@.  But that reminds me
> >> to go see what are current options are for free/cheap compute servers.
> >>>
> >>> On 2/5/19, 1:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>   Sounds like best plan ever. Using the same PC by everyone is 
awesome!
> >>>
> >>>   On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 8:39 PM Harbs  >>>
>  A big +1 from me!
> 
>  Looking forward!
> 
> > On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 PM, Alex Harui 
> >> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have 

RE: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-06 Thread Yishay Weiss
I like this plan better. Seems it would require less changes to existing 
scripts and code base. Also, if the end result is that anyone with docker 
installed only needs to run a script the bar for becoming an RM should be lower.




From: OmPrakash Muppirala 
Sent: Wednesday, February 6, 2019 12:07:55 AM
To: dev@royale.apache.org
Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release

I was wondering if we can use docker images to setup and seal the RM
environment.  Then other RMs simply need to run the image locally and run
the release scripts.  Might be easier.  If folks like this plan, I can try
to put something together.

Thanks,
Om

On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:40 PM Harbs  wrote:

> In a recent discussion, it looks like other projects have gotten resources
> from AWS.
>
> Whatever service we use, could setup a “shared” Royale account that all
> PMC members could have access to.
>
> I don’t know if there’s some way we could leverage Gitlab’s integration
> pipelines https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html <
> https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html>
>
> > On Feb 5, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
> >
> > Well, the big hole in this plan is that I think we have to use someone's
> personal VM account (in this case, mine).  I can't think of a way we can
> run interactive commands like git push on builds@.  But that reminds me
> to go see what are current options are for free/cheap compute servers.
> >
> > On 2/5/19, 1:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
> >
> >Sounds like best plan ever. Using the same PC by everyone is awesome!
> >
> >On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 8:39 PM Harbs  >
> >> A big +1 from me!
> >>
> >> Looking forward!
> >>
> >>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 PM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have finished the changes
> >> to get production Royale modules to work in Tour De Flex.  Lots of other
> >> good changes have been contributed.
> >>>
> >>> There were emails around the 0.9.4 release about others stepping up to
> >> cut the next release, but that hasn't happened.  I tried and failed to
> get
> >> Apache Infra to allow us to run our release packaging on the Jenkins
> >> servers.  They felt there were too many security concerns with having
> the
> >> servers push changes to Git and PGP sign artifacts.
> >>>
> >>> However, we MUST find a way for other RMs to be successful.  There is
> no
> >> way I should or want to be the only RM.  But I have an idea that
> involves
> >> creating a long list of Jenkins jobs on my CI server that add up to the
> >> release.  The RM would log into Jenkins and run some job titled "Apache
> >> Royale Release Step 1", then wait for an email indicating that it
> completed
> >> and follow instructions in the email, such as logging into the CI server
> >> via Remote Desktop, opening a command prompt and running "git push" and
> >> entering his/her username and password.  Then run the next job and so
> on.
> >> There will be a point where the RM has to download the build artifacts,
> >> verify them, then PGP sign them, and upload them.  That will be a likely
> >> point of failure, but that step should be a single Maven command and
> thus
> >> can be restarted until it finally succeeds.  Then more Jenkins jobs
> will be
> >> run.  But if this works then folks won't have to setup their computers
> to
> >> be an RM.
> >>>
> >>> So, prepare for lots of commits and reverts as I try to put this
> >> together.  I'm guessing it won't actually work until the last week of
> >> February at the earliest so there is no big rush to get other stuff in
> for
> >> this release, and if we get it to work, hopefully we'll release more
> often
> >> with other folks being the RM.
> >>>
> >>> -Alex
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>


Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-05 Thread Carlos Rovira
Hi.

the plan sounds very good to me. Just my 2 thoughts on this:

1.- As I was reading I was thinking as well on something like Docker and
see Om as well thinking on the same. Maybe is the way to this with the
actual technology. Seems VMs are stepping out a bit this days in favor of
things like Docker. Maybe the same did Git over Svn, and today Svn is an
old remembrance. I must say that I have no experience with Docker, so doing
that will require acquire that knowledge, but seems it could be worth it.

2.- Maybe is not possible, but I want to propose to do this work I a
separate branch, so it could be in parallel to other developments. I think
work over develop is practical if there's something tiny that could be done
in a commit. But as we need more than one, or is a long process (like
this), chances are to make develop branch unstable and even for some days.
I think we should try to avoid that scenario, and branches are the best
way. If we do this way, we'll benefit of more reliable develop branch.

Thanks and good to know of this plan :)

Carlos


El mar., 5 feb. 2019 a las 23:19, Harbs () escribió:

> I’ve never used Docker myself, but that might be a good plan.
>
> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 12:07 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala 
> wrote:
> >
> > I was wondering if we can use docker images to setup and seal the RM
> > environment.  Then other RMs simply need to run the image locally and run
> > the release scripts.  Might be easier.  If folks like this plan, I can
> try
> > to put something together.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Om
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:40 PM Harbs  wrote:
> >
> >> In a recent discussion, it looks like other projects have gotten
> resources
> >> from AWS.
> >>
> >> Whatever service we use, could setup a “shared” Royale account that all
> >> PMC members could have access to.
> >>
> >> I don’t know if there’s some way we could leverage Gitlab’s integration
> >> pipelines https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html <
> >> https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html>
> >>
> >>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Alex Harui 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Well, the big hole in this plan is that I think we have to use
> someone's
> >> personal VM account (in this case, mine).  I can't think of a way we can
> >> run interactive commands like git push on builds@.  But that reminds me
> >> to go see what are current options are for free/cheap compute servers.
> >>>
> >>> On 2/5/19, 1:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>   Sounds like best plan ever. Using the same PC by everyone is awesome!
> >>>
> >>>   On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 8:39 PM Harbs  >>>
>  A big +1 from me!
> 
>  Looking forward!
> 
> > On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 PM, Alex Harui 
> >> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have finished the
> changes
>  to get production Royale modules to work in Tour De Flex.  Lots of
> other
>  good changes have been contributed.
> >
> > There were emails around the 0.9.4 release about others stepping up
> to
>  cut the next release, but that hasn't happened.  I tried and failed to
> >> get
>  Apache Infra to allow us to run our release packaging on the Jenkins
>  servers.  They felt there were too many security concerns with having
> >> the
>  servers push changes to Git and PGP sign artifacts.
> >
> > However, we MUST find a way for other RMs to be successful.  There is
> >> no
>  way I should or want to be the only RM.  But I have an idea that
> >> involves
>  creating a long list of Jenkins jobs on my CI server that add up to
> the
>  release.  The RM would log into Jenkins and run some job titled
> "Apache
>  Royale Release Step 1", then wait for an email indicating that it
> >> completed
>  and follow instructions in the email, such as logging into the CI
> server
>  via Remote Desktop, opening a command prompt and running "git push"
> and
>  entering his/her username and password.  Then run the next job and so
> >> on.
>  There will be a point where the RM has to download the build
> artifacts,
>  verify them, then PGP sign them, and upload them.  That will be a
> likely
>  point of failure, but that step should be a single Maven command and
> >> thus
>  can be restarted until it finally succeeds.  Then more Jenkins jobs
> >> will be
>  run.  But if this works then folks won't have to setup their computers
> >> to
>  be an RM.
> >
> > So, prepare for lots of commits and reverts as I try to put this
>  together.  I'm guessing it won't actually work until the last week of
>  February at the earliest so there is no big rush to get other stuff in
> >> for
>  this release, and if we get it to work, hopefully we'll release more
> >> often
>  with other folks being the RM.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
> 
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>

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


Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-05 Thread Harbs
I’ve never used Docker myself, but that might be a good plan.

> On Feb 6, 2019, at 12:07 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala  wrote:
> 
> I was wondering if we can use docker images to setup and seal the RM
> environment.  Then other RMs simply need to run the image locally and run
> the release scripts.  Might be easier.  If folks like this plan, I can try
> to put something together.
> 
> Thanks,
> Om
> 
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:40 PM Harbs  wrote:
> 
>> In a recent discussion, it looks like other projects have gotten resources
>> from AWS.
>> 
>> Whatever service we use, could setup a “shared” Royale account that all
>> PMC members could have access to.
>> 
>> I don’t know if there’s some way we could leverage Gitlab’s integration
>> pipelines https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html <
>> https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html>
>> 
>>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Alex Harui 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Well, the big hole in this plan is that I think we have to use someone's
>> personal VM account (in this case, mine).  I can't think of a way we can
>> run interactive commands like git push on builds@.  But that reminds me
>> to go see what are current options are for free/cheap compute servers.
>>> 
>>> On 2/5/19, 1:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
>>> 
>>>   Sounds like best plan ever. Using the same PC by everyone is awesome!
>>> 
>>>   On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 8:39 PM Harbs >> 
 A big +1 from me!
 
 Looking forward!
 
> On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 PM, Alex Harui 
>> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have finished the changes
 to get production Royale modules to work in Tour De Flex.  Lots of other
 good changes have been contributed.
> 
> There were emails around the 0.9.4 release about others stepping up to
 cut the next release, but that hasn't happened.  I tried and failed to
>> get
 Apache Infra to allow us to run our release packaging on the Jenkins
 servers.  They felt there were too many security concerns with having
>> the
 servers push changes to Git and PGP sign artifacts.
> 
> However, we MUST find a way for other RMs to be successful.  There is
>> no
 way I should or want to be the only RM.  But I have an idea that
>> involves
 creating a long list of Jenkins jobs on my CI server that add up to the
 release.  The RM would log into Jenkins and run some job titled "Apache
 Royale Release Step 1", then wait for an email indicating that it
>> completed
 and follow instructions in the email, such as logging into the CI server
 via Remote Desktop, opening a command prompt and running "git push" and
 entering his/her username and password.  Then run the next job and so
>> on.
 There will be a point where the RM has to download the build artifacts,
 verify them, then PGP sign them, and upload them.  That will be a likely
 point of failure, but that step should be a single Maven command and
>> thus
 can be restarted until it finally succeeds.  Then more Jenkins jobs
>> will be
 run.  But if this works then folks won't have to setup their computers
>> to
 be an RM.
> 
> So, prepare for lots of commits and reverts as I try to put this
 together.  I'm guessing it won't actually work until the last week of
 February at the earliest so there is no big rush to get other stuff in
>> for
 this release, and if we get it to work, hopefully we'll release more
>> often
 with other folks being the RM.
> 
> -Alex
> 
 
 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 



Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-05 Thread OmPrakash Muppirala
I was wondering if we can use docker images to setup and seal the RM
environment.  Then other RMs simply need to run the image locally and run
the release scripts.  Might be easier.  If folks like this plan, I can try
to put something together.

Thanks,
Om

On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:40 PM Harbs  wrote:

> In a recent discussion, it looks like other projects have gotten resources
> from AWS.
>
> Whatever service we use, could setup a “shared” Royale account that all
> PMC members could have access to.
>
> I don’t know if there’s some way we could leverage Gitlab’s integration
> pipelines https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html <
> https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html>
>
> > On Feb 5, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
> >
> > Well, the big hole in this plan is that I think we have to use someone's
> personal VM account (in this case, mine).  I can't think of a way we can
> run interactive commands like git push on builds@.  But that reminds me
> to go see what are current options are for free/cheap compute servers.
> >
> > On 2/5/19, 1:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
> >
> >Sounds like best plan ever. Using the same PC by everyone is awesome!
> >
> >On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 8:39 PM Harbs  >
> >> A big +1 from me!
> >>
> >> Looking forward!
> >>
> >>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 PM, Alex Harui 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have finished the changes
> >> to get production Royale modules to work in Tour De Flex.  Lots of other
> >> good changes have been contributed.
> >>>
> >>> There were emails around the 0.9.4 release about others stepping up to
> >> cut the next release, but that hasn't happened.  I tried and failed to
> get
> >> Apache Infra to allow us to run our release packaging on the Jenkins
> >> servers.  They felt there were too many security concerns with having
> the
> >> servers push changes to Git and PGP sign artifacts.
> >>>
> >>> However, we MUST find a way for other RMs to be successful.  There is
> no
> >> way I should or want to be the only RM.  But I have an idea that
> involves
> >> creating a long list of Jenkins jobs on my CI server that add up to the
> >> release.  The RM would log into Jenkins and run some job titled "Apache
> >> Royale Release Step 1", then wait for an email indicating that it
> completed
> >> and follow instructions in the email, such as logging into the CI server
> >> via Remote Desktop, opening a command prompt and running "git push" and
> >> entering his/her username and password.  Then run the next job and so
> on.
> >> There will be a point where the RM has to download the build artifacts,
> >> verify them, then PGP sign them, and upload them.  That will be a likely
> >> point of failure, but that step should be a single Maven command and
> thus
> >> can be restarted until it finally succeeds.  Then more Jenkins jobs
> will be
> >> run.  But if this works then folks won't have to setup their computers
> to
> >> be an RM.
> >>>
> >>> So, prepare for lots of commits and reverts as I try to put this
> >> together.  I'm guessing it won't actually work until the last week of
> >> February at the earliest so there is no big rush to get other stuff in
> for
> >> this release, and if we get it to work, hopefully we'll release more
> often
> >> with other folks being the RM.
> >>>
> >>> -Alex
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>


Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-05 Thread Harbs
In a recent discussion, it looks like other projects have gotten resources from 
AWS.

Whatever service we use, could setup a “shared” Royale account that all PMC 
members could have access to.

I don’t know if there’s some way we could leverage Gitlab’s integration 
pipelines https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html 


> On Feb 5, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:
> 
> Well, the big hole in this plan is that I think we have to use someone's 
> personal VM account (in this case, mine).  I can't think of a way we can run 
> interactive commands like git push on builds@.  But that reminds me to go see 
> what are current options are for free/cheap compute servers.
> 
> On 2/5/19, 1:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:
> 
>Sounds like best plan ever. Using the same PC by everyone is awesome!
> 
>On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 8:39 PM Harbs  
>> A big +1 from me!
>> 
>> Looking forward!
>> 
>>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have finished the changes
>> to get production Royale modules to work in Tour De Flex.  Lots of other
>> good changes have been contributed.
>>> 
>>> There were emails around the 0.9.4 release about others stepping up to
>> cut the next release, but that hasn't happened.  I tried and failed to get
>> Apache Infra to allow us to run our release packaging on the Jenkins
>> servers.  They felt there were too many security concerns with having the
>> servers push changes to Git and PGP sign artifacts.
>>> 
>>> However, we MUST find a way for other RMs to be successful.  There is no
>> way I should or want to be the only RM.  But I have an idea that involves
>> creating a long list of Jenkins jobs on my CI server that add up to the
>> release.  The RM would log into Jenkins and run some job titled "Apache
>> Royale Release Step 1", then wait for an email indicating that it completed
>> and follow instructions in the email, such as logging into the CI server
>> via Remote Desktop, opening a command prompt and running "git push" and
>> entering his/her username and password.  Then run the next job and so on.
>> There will be a point where the RM has to download the build artifacts,
>> verify them, then PGP sign them, and upload them.  That will be a likely
>> point of failure, but that step should be a single Maven command and thus
>> can be restarted until it finally succeeds.  Then more Jenkins jobs will be
>> run.  But if this works then folks won't have to setup their computers to
>> be an RM.
>>> 
>>> So, prepare for lots of commits and reverts as I try to put this
>> together.  I'm guessing it won't actually work until the last week of
>> February at the earliest so there is no big rush to get other stuff in for
>> this release, and if we get it to work, hopefully we'll release more often
>> with other folks being the RM.
>>> 
>>> -Alex
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 



Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-05 Thread Alex Harui
Well, the big hole in this plan is that I think we have to use someone's 
personal VM account (in this case, mine).  I can't think of a way we can run 
interactive commands like git push on builds@.  But that reminds me to go see 
what are current options are for free/cheap compute servers.

On 2/5/19, 1:20 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki"  wrote:

Sounds like best plan ever. Using the same PC by everyone is awesome!

On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 8:39 PM Harbs  A big +1 from me!
>
> Looking forward!
>
> > On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have finished the changes
> to get production Royale modules to work in Tour De Flex.  Lots of other
> good changes have been contributed.
> >
> > There were emails around the 0.9.4 release about others stepping up to
> cut the next release, but that hasn't happened.  I tried and failed to get
> Apache Infra to allow us to run our release packaging on the Jenkins
> servers.  They felt there were too many security concerns with having the
> servers push changes to Git and PGP sign artifacts.
> >
> > However, we MUST find a way for other RMs to be successful.  There is no
> way I should or want to be the only RM.  But I have an idea that involves
> creating a long list of Jenkins jobs on my CI server that add up to the
> release.  The RM would log into Jenkins and run some job titled "Apache
> Royale Release Step 1", then wait for an email indicating that it 
completed
> and follow instructions in the email, such as logging into the CI server
> via Remote Desktop, opening a command prompt and running "git push" and
> entering his/her username and password.  Then run the next job and so on.
> There will be a point where the RM has to download the build artifacts,
> verify them, then PGP sign them, and upload them.  That will be a likely
> point of failure, but that step should be a single Maven command and thus
> can be restarted until it finally succeeds.  Then more Jenkins jobs will 
be
> run.  But if this works then folks won't have to setup their computers to
> be an RM.
> >
> > So, prepare for lots of commits and reverts as I try to put this
> together.  I'm guessing it won't actually work until the last week of
> February at the earliest so there is no big rush to get other stuff in for
> this release, and if we get it to work, hopefully we'll release more often
> with other folks being the RM.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
>
>




Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-05 Thread Piotr Zarzycki
Sounds like best plan ever. Using the same PC by everyone is awesome!

On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 8:39 PM Harbs  A big +1 from me!
>
> Looking forward!
>
> > On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have finished the changes
> to get production Royale modules to work in Tour De Flex.  Lots of other
> good changes have been contributed.
> >
> > There were emails around the 0.9.4 release about others stepping up to
> cut the next release, but that hasn't happened.  I tried and failed to get
> Apache Infra to allow us to run our release packaging on the Jenkins
> servers.  They felt there were too many security concerns with having the
> servers push changes to Git and PGP sign artifacts.
> >
> > However, we MUST find a way for other RMs to be successful.  There is no
> way I should or want to be the only RM.  But I have an idea that involves
> creating a long list of Jenkins jobs on my CI server that add up to the
> release.  The RM would log into Jenkins and run some job titled "Apache
> Royale Release Step 1", then wait for an email indicating that it completed
> and follow instructions in the email, such as logging into the CI server
> via Remote Desktop, opening a command prompt and running "git push" and
> entering his/her username and password.  Then run the next job and so on.
> There will be a point where the RM has to download the build artifacts,
> verify them, then PGP sign them, and upload them.  That will be a likely
> point of failure, but that step should be a single Maven command and thus
> can be restarted until it finally succeeds.  Then more Jenkins jobs will be
> run.  But if this works then folks won't have to setup their computers to
> be an RM.
> >
> > So, prepare for lots of commits and reverts as I try to put this
> together.  I'm guessing it won't actually work until the last week of
> February at the earliest so there is no big rush to get other stuff in for
> this release, and if we get it to work, hopefully we'll release more often
> with other folks being the RM.
> >
> > -Alex
> >
>
>


Re: 0.9.6 Release

2019-02-05 Thread Harbs
A big +1 from me!

Looking forward!

> On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have finished the changes to get 
> production Royale modules to work in Tour De Flex.  Lots of other good 
> changes have been contributed.
> 
> There were emails around the 0.9.4 release about others stepping up to cut 
> the next release, but that hasn't happened.  I tried and failed to get Apache 
> Infra to allow us to run our release packaging on the Jenkins servers.  They 
> felt there were too many security concerns with having the servers push 
> changes to Git and PGP sign artifacts.
> 
> However, we MUST find a way for other RMs to be successful.  There is no way 
> I should or want to be the only RM.  But I have an idea that involves 
> creating a long list of Jenkins jobs on my CI server that add up to the 
> release.  The RM would log into Jenkins and run some job titled "Apache 
> Royale Release Step 1", then wait for an email indicating that it completed 
> and follow instructions in the email, such as logging into the CI server via 
> Remote Desktop, opening a command prompt and running "git push" and entering 
> his/her username and password.  Then run the next job and so on.  There will 
> be a point where the RM has to download the build artifacts, verify them, 
> then PGP sign them, and upload them.  That will be a likely point of failure, 
> but that step should be a single Maven command and thus can be restarted 
> until it finally succeeds.  Then more Jenkins jobs will be run.  But if this 
> works then folks won't have to setup their computers to be an RM.
> 
> So, prepare for lots of commits and reverts as I try to put this together.  
> I'm guessing it won't actually work until the last week of February at the 
> earliest so there is no big rush to get other stuff in for this release, and 
> if we get it to work, hopefully we'll release more often with other folks 
> being the RM.
> 
> -Alex
> 



0.9.6 Release

2019-02-05 Thread Alex Harui
Hi,

We are coming up on 3 months since 0.9.4.  I have finished the changes to get 
production Royale modules to work in Tour De Flex.  Lots of other good changes 
have been contributed.

There were emails around the 0.9.4 release about others stepping up to cut the 
next release, but that hasn't happened.  I tried and failed to get Apache Infra 
to allow us to run our release packaging on the Jenkins servers.  They felt 
there were too many security concerns with having the servers push changes to 
Git and PGP sign artifacts.

However, we MUST find a way for other RMs to be successful.  There is no way I 
should or want to be the only RM.  But I have an idea that involves creating a 
long list of Jenkins jobs on my CI server that add up to the release.  The RM 
would log into Jenkins and run some job titled "Apache Royale Release Step 1", 
then wait for an email indicating that it completed and follow instructions in 
the email, such as logging into the CI server via Remote Desktop, opening a 
command prompt and running "git push" and entering his/her username and 
password.  Then run the next job and so on.  There will be a point where the RM 
has to download the build artifacts, verify them, then PGP sign them, and 
upload them.  That will be a likely point of failure, but that step should be a 
single Maven command and thus can be restarted until it finally succeeds.  Then 
more Jenkins jobs will be run.  But if this works then folks won't have to 
setup their computers to be an RM.

So, prepare for lots of commits and reverts as I try to put this together.  I'm 
guessing it won't actually work until the last week of February at the earliest 
so there is no big rush to get other stuff in for this release, and if we get 
it to work, hopefully we'll release more often with other folks being the RM.

-Alex