Re: [royale-compiler] 09/20: change more flexjs to royale per Issue #17

I came up with an idea. I created enough issues to track other things I noticed in changing over to Royale such that I could create issue #17 for the change over. HTH, -Alex On 10/4/17, 7:58 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: >Hi Piotr, > >I have no idea how to fix this. I

Re: [royale-compiler] 09/20: change more flexjs to royale per Issue #17

Hi Piotr, I have no idea how to fix this. I will try to do better next time. Sorry, -Alex On 10/4/17, 3:43 PM, "Piotr Zarzycki" wrote: >Hi Alex, > >If we would like to point to the issue in commit message from one repo >(royale-compiler) to the other one

Re: Github Pages (was Re: Github wikis)

I believe we can have it available at a different URL (i.e. royalesdk.org/docs ) using CNAME entries: https://help.github.com/articles/using-a-custom-domain-with-github-pages/ > On Oct 4,

Re: Github Pages (was Re: Github wikis)

I can’t find Olaf’s wiki. Remind me of the URL? > On Oct 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Piotr Zarzycki wrote: > > Thanks Alex. I'm just asking cause I was thinking where I can start with > all of that. I believe that documentation is our true weak point. > > Harbs do you have

Re: Github Pages (was Re: Github wikis)

Here you go -> https://github.com/ok-at-github/flexjs-docs/wiki Thanks, Piotr 2017-10-04 9:04 GMT+02:00 Harbs : > I can’t find Olaf’s wiki. Remind me of the URL? > > > On Oct 4, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Piotr Zarzycki > wrote: > > > > Thanks Alex. I'm

RE: FileReference implementation

[2] https://github.com/yishayw/Examples From: Yishay Weiss Sent: Wednesday, October 4, 2017 11:22 AM To: dev@royale.apache.org; ngra...@idylog.com Subject: RE: FileReference implementation I added an example

Re: Github Pages (was Re: Github wikis)

Thanks Alex. I'm just asking cause I was thinking where I can start with all of that. I believe that documentation is our true weak point. Harbs do you have some plans in case of the docs ? Do you think that Olaf's work can be used ? Piotr 2017-10-04 8:54 GMT+02:00 Harbs

Re: Github Pages (was Re: Github wikis)

Thanks. The structure there and a lot of the content is great. We should definitely copy it into docs. We should probably figure out the best way to write the docs and get started… ;-) I just added a link to his wiki from the docs page for now. Does anyone think we need a wiki for the docs

Re: Github Pages (was Re: Github wikis)

> (i.e. royalesdk.org/docs ) That should have been docs.royalesdk.org . > On Oct 4, 2017, at 9:54 AM, Harbs wrote: > > I believe we can have it available at a different URL (i.e. > royalesdk.org/docs

Re: Nightly Builds Available

I think what Piotr propose is very good for organization, revision and matching with issues. The workflow I know (and I think works pretty well) is the following. Notice that this method tries to always develop in branches and ensures develop is always stable and green. That should be our mantra,

Re: Github Pages (was Re: Github wikis)

I'm not sure we have that choice. I think we are part of an organization and have to use a separate repo. Maybe that's better because we have several code repos. The repo is: https://github.com/apache/royale-docs When you push it becomes available here:

RE: FileReference implementation

Thank you, Yishay. Nicolas Granon > -Message d'origine- > De : Yishay Weiss [mailto:yishayj...@hotmail.com] > Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 10:23 > À : dev@royale.apache.org; ngra...@idylog.com; dev@royale.apache.org; > ngra...@idylog.com > Objet : RE: FileReference implementation >

RE: FileReference implementation

I added an example [1] for loading a file to my examples repo. At some point we’ll want to move this repo to Apache but you can browse this and other examples here [2] for the time being. [1] https://github.com/yishayw/Examples/tree/FileProxy From: Harbs Sent:

Re: [DISCUSS] project vs. project name

Makes sense to me. But I do think that we probably want different release packages. For someone who only cares about JS compatible components, they have no need to install anything Flash related. For someone only interested in outputting pure JS and don’t need components at all, they wouldn’t

Re: [DISCUSS] project vs. project name

Wouldn't we just release an SDK instead? Like Royale SDK and skip the JS part? -Mark K On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 6:25 AM, Carlos Rovira wrote: > Hi, > > my opinion on this regard is that having many sub names (aka product names) > and packages will only confuse

[Royale] Using nightly builds

I am not very familiar with the use of "nightly builds". Could you please confirm that I got it right ? 1 All that is needed is hosted at http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/ 2 Get the build from the "royale-asjs-jsonly" folder 2.1 since I do not want to build from source, I should

Re: [DISCUSS] project vs. project name

An installer type thing? -Mark K > Maybe it is possible to have just one package, but different install scripts > ? (full, swf only, js only ?) > For people like me (app developers) it makes sense. > However, I'm not sure that a no-component install will be of interest for > much people...

Re: [Royale] Using nightly builds

Hi Nicolas, I believe it is enough. Did you experience some problems ? Of course since this is JS only you need to have in your compiler config setup -targets= JSFlex. Piotr 2017-10-04 19:41 GMT+02:00 Idylog - Nicolas Granon : > I am not very familiar with the use of

RE: [Royale] Using nightly builds

No problem. I just did want to check that I had a correct understanding *before* I begin ! Thanks a lot Nicolas Granon > -Message d'origine- > De : Piotr Zarzycki [mailto:piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com] > Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 20:59 > À : dev@royale.apache.org;

Re: [royale-compiler] 09/20: change more flexjs to royale per Issue #17

Hi Alex, If we would like to point to the issue in commit message from one repo (royale-compiler) to the other one (royale-asjs) - it should look: "Commit message (reference apache/royale-asjs#17) - Commit message to royale-compiler, but issue is raised in royale-asjs. If some day in