Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi Carlos, Here you have settings.xml which I'm using. Please try this one with Approve script [1]. Pay attention in it that I have put there staging artifacts link, so you know what I'm talking about in the next release. According to what Josh is saying this settings with staging artifacts should

Re: [royale-asjs] branch release/0.9.6 updated: fix ASDoc js-only

Hi Andrew, can you specify what you mean? Here's the download page with all download links: https://royale.apache.org/download/ El dom., 22 sept. 2019 a las 20:11, Andrew Wetmore () escribió: > Could it not also be posted on the website, where the link for downloading > the release is? > > On Sa

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #1182

See Changes: [carlosrovira] update all jewel themes with collapsible styles -- [...truncated 1003.86 KB...] [mxmlc] scanning for overrid

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi Piotr, I want to try now. To try this xml with Approve xml workflow: 1.- should I put it in my .m2 folder (and remove mine)? or there's another way? 2.- should I remove all my env vars in my .bash_profile? 3.- I assume I must run the command: "ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hey Carlos, Answers inline. pon., 23 wrz 2019 o 12:34 Carlos Rovira napisał(a): > Hi Piotr, > > I want to try now. To try this xml with Approve xml workflow: > > 1.- should I put it in my .m2 folder (and remove mine)? or there's another > way? > Yes. You can also try to modify maven target and

Re: [royale-asjs] branch release/0.9.6 updated: fix ASDoc js-only

The question is whether we release 0.9.6 when the instructions for compiling from source are incomplete and/or inaccurate. For 0.9.4 the page says "The current version of *Apache Royale* is *0.9.4*, released in *Diciembre, 2018*. It is *beta-quality*. This means that Royale may not work entirely a

Re: [royale-asjs] branch release/0.9.6 updated: fix ASDoc js-only

Oops: edited my proposed text and did not check it afterwards. What I meant was this for the release page for 0.9.6:: "The current version of Apache Royale is 0.9.6, released in MONTH YEAR. It is beta-quality. This means that Royale may not work entirely as you or we want it to, and that certain s

Re: [royale-asjs] branch release/0.9.6 updated: fix ASDoc js-only

Hi Andrew, ok I understand. IMHO, instructions should be as easy as possible. People that see steps depending on things that are not clear will be mostly lost and with high probability of never come back. Royale SDK is a complex technology with many pieces involved, we should make the install pro

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi, sorry to say that build failed. Here's the final log. Mostly the same problem with flash player as always: 0 MBProgress (1): 1.0/1.0 MBProgress (1): 1.0/1.0 MBProgress (1): 1.0/1.0 MBProgress (1): 1.0/1.0 MBProgress (1): 1.0/1.0 MBProgress (1): 1.0/1.0 MBProgress (1): 1.0/1.0 MBProgress (1):

Re: [royale-asjs] branch release/0.9.6 updated: fix ASDoc js-only

Yes: the PERFECT would be clear and simple instructions that work and do not scare people away. We do not seem to have those. I thought the discussion was whether to go forward with the release anyhow, since the number of users who build from source is smaller than the number who use the compiled b

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #1183

See -- [...truncated 1003.99 KB...] [mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ObjectUtil [mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SolidBorderUtil [mxmlc] scanning

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Carlos, It's not exactly the same, cause my settings eliminate one issue from your log. I have send you player global off list - just put it manually into Maven folder and try again. Thanks, Piotr pon., 23 wrz 2019 o 13:50 Carlos Rovira napisał(a): > Hi, > > sorry to say that build failed. Her

Re: [royale-asjs] branch release/0.9.6 updated: fix ASDoc js-only

I hope the few people building from sources would try with actual instructions and if they have problems come to the list and try to solve it with our help, so we can improve scripts and build process learning from that kind of experiences. El lun., 23 sept. 2019 a las 14:05, Andrew Wetmore () esc

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi all, Piotr and I discover off list the following: this is what I have in my .m2 [image: Captura de pantalla 2019-09-23 a las 16.11.04.png] and this the Pitro's package layout that sent me off list: [image: Captura de pantalla 2019-09-23 a las 16.12.19.png] how is possible Piotr and I get d

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi, sorry, but just notice that both layouts are exactly the same :? The only change is in playerglobal-20.0.pom.lastUpdated Piotrs is: #NOTE: This is an Aether internal implementation file, its format can be changed without prior notice. #Tue Aug 13 05:59:44 CEST 2019 https\://repository.apach

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Carlos, Mailing list won't allow post screenshot. Upload them somewhere and post links. pon., 23 wrz 2019 o 16:27 Carlos Rovira napisał(a): > Hi all, > > Piotr and I discover off list the following: > > this is what I have in my .m2 > [image: Captura de pantalla 2019-09-23 a las 16.11.04.png] >

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi Piotr, since finally layouts are the same, I think is not worth it to do the sending. The only difference is the file exposed in my last email El lun., 23 sept. 2019 a las 16:47, Piotr Zarzycki (< piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>) escribió: > Carlos, > > Mailing list won't allow post screenshot. Upl

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Ok so what is the output of your build now ? pon., 23 wrz 2019 o 17:11 Carlos Rovira napisał(a): > Hi Piotr, > since finally layouts are the same, I think is not worth it to do the > sending. > The only difference is the file exposed in my last email > > El lun., 23 sept. 2019 a las 16:47, Piotr

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi Piotr, sorry, ignore my latest emails. Since I forgot to switch .m2 repositories. In the real one there's no such layout Going to rerun again. El lun., 23 sept. 2019 a las 17:13, Piotr Zarzycki (< piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>) escribió: > Ok so what is the output of your build now ? > > pon.

Re: [Discuss] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Update: There is definitely a problem with the source package that prevents building the source with Maven from a truly clean machine. I have some changes pending. This is going to be a pretty large commit as if affects a lot of files. I'm not sure why Piotr is have Carlos continue to try t

Re: [Discuss] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Alex, Carlos is able to build framework by ANT so to me it's enough to go with release. I have pushed him to try cause I thought that with some small workarounds he will be able to build that as well. Thanks, Piotr pon., 23 wrz 2019 o 17:46 Alex Harui napisał(a): > Update: There is definitely

Re: [Discuss] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Depends on your definition of small. The .mvn/extensions.xml is missing from royale-compiler. That's why it won't auto-download the Adobe stuff. Then almost every pom.xml needs to be changed to support js-only. -Alex On 9/23/19, 8:50 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" wrote: Alex, Carlos is

Re: [Discuss] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

My point is that all those fixes are for SDK Developers, not for Users. I would like to satisfy users not SDK developers, the first one are waiting too long for release. pon., 23 wrz 2019 o 17:53 Alex Harui napisał(a): > Depends on your definition of small. The .mvn/extensions.xml is missing >

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi Piotr, For this hour my laptop was running the build again, and now the script seems to end in an endless loop repeating this in console all the time: "Dcom.adobe.systemIdsForWhichTheTermsOfTheAdobeLicenseAgreementAreAccepted=6d2bc022 ) Do you accept (Yes/No) ? Your System-Id: 6d2bc022 The A

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Do you have this env. setup systemIdsForWhichTheTermsOfTheAdobeLicenseAgreementAreAccepted ? You need to have with value I think 6d2bc022. pon., 23 wrz 2019 o 18:33 Carlos Rovira napisał(a): > Hi Piotr, > > For this hour my laptop was running the build again, and now the script > seems to end i

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi, process did the same endless loop. @Piotr Zarzycki do you mean to add to may .bash_profile "export systemIdsForWhichTheTermsOfTheAdobeLicenseAgreementAreAccepted= 6d2bc022" ? El lun., 23 sept. 2019 a las 18:40, Piotr Zarzycki (< piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>) escribió: > Do you have this env

Re: [Discuss] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Hi, I will stop for today, want to work a bit on royale-docs mobile layout that I have near finish, so I'll wait for Alex changes and try tomorrow. IMHO this stuff is important, so it's worth the waiting time of a day or two. Thanks El lun., 23 sept. 201. 9 a las 17:59, Piotr Zarzycki (< pio

[Discuss] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Carlos, Well I don't see importance from user perspective to that changes at all. It means that you are not going to vote? Thanks, Piotr On Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 7:22 PM Carlos Rovira wrote: > Hi, > > I will stop for today, want to work a bit on royale-docs mobile layout that > I have near finish

[DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

Anyone know what should Carlos setup in that environment variable to pass farther? On Mon, Sep 23, 2019, 7:18 PM Carlos Rovira wrote: > Hi, > process did the same endless loop. > > @Piotr Zarzycki do you mean to add to may > .bash_profile "export > systemIdsForWhichTheTermsOfTheAdobeLicenseAgre

Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

The value is different for each individual's computer. It is meant as an acceptance of a LICENSE, not a workaround to avoid acceptance of a LICENSE. -Alex On 9/23/19, 9:40 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" wrote: Do you have this env. setup systemIdsForWhichTheTermsOfTheAdobeLicenseAgreementAreAc

Re: [Discuss] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

The reason I am unsure about this release is that, in theory, we all agreed to be PMC members to make growing the community our primary goal. To achieve that goal, we should be doing things to attract not just new users, but even more importantly, new committers. We know we've got tons of bugs

New apache-royale questions for Sep 23 - Stack Exchange

***1 new question in [ApacheRoyale Tag Notifications filter]() on stackexchange.com*** [How to use graphic svg elements with apache royale?](

Re: [Discuss] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.6 RC2

OK, I think I saw Maven build with and without the Flash stuff. I pushed the changes to the release branch. The changes required reverting the version numbers on royale-compiler and royale-asjs but not royale-typedefs. To build with the Adobe stuff with Maven, you will have to use system prop

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #1184

See -- [...truncated 1003.42 KB...] [mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ObjectUtil [mxmlc] scanning for overrides: SolidBorderUtil [mxmlc] scanning

Build failed in Jenkins: royale-asjs_MXTests #1185

See Changes: [harbs] Fixed #480 -- [...truncated 1003.58 KB...] [mxmlc] scanning for overrides: ObjectUtil [mxmlc] scanning for over

Re: [royale-asjs] branch develop updated: Fixed #480

Isn't that "just-in-case"? If the fill does not change at runtime, each instance still called the updateView() function? -Alex On 9/23/19, 10:59 PM, "ha...@apache.org" wrote: This is an automated email from the ASF dual-hosted git repository. harbs pushed a commit to branch deve