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 <[email protected]>:

> 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 get the -bin.zip
> file
>
> 3 Create a folder and unzip the archive in that folder (as I did for the
> last release 0.8)
>
> 4 In the IDE (VSCode, in my case), point to the said folder (modify the
> asconfig file)
>
> Is this the correct way ?
> Is there anything else that I should also get from the apacheflexbuild
> site ? (compiler ?...)
>
> Thank you,
>
> Nicolas Granon
>
>
>
>
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : Harbs [mailto:[email protected]]
> > Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 15:37
> > À : [email protected]
> > Objet : 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 need
> > much more than the compiler and some typedef swcs. Different packages
> > should probably have different compiler defaults.
> >
> > The different release packages might have different names.
> >
> >
> > > On Oct 4, 2017, at 1:24 PM, Mark Kessler
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > 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
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> my opinion on this regard is that having many sub names (aka product
> > names)
> > >> and packages will only confuse people coming to Royale.
> > >> As well, I think we already manage outputs via compiler params to
> > dictate
> > >> if we want to target one or more outputs.
> > >> So I'll be more happy with only one name and only one package that
> > could
> > >> output JS, WASM, SWF, ....)
> > >>
> > >> People coming from Flex will find us and will know we can be their
> > solutions
> > >> Meanwhile people that search for a frontend tech, will come to read
> > about
> > >> Angular, React, ...and hope in some time Royale. We don't
> > >> want those people be contaminated for old Flash or Flex that could
> > make
> > >> them not choose us for something is not relevant to us.
> > >>
> > >> So I think we should always look forward and as we decided to remove
> > "JS",
> > >> we should as well not have a "FlexJS" version inside
> > >>
> > >> That's my 2ctn
> > >>
> > >> Thanks
> > >>
> > >> Carlos
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2017-10-02 11:25 GMT+02:00 Erik de Bruin <[email protected]>:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> With the renaming effort planned to start right after the
> > 'packaging'
> > >>> branch lands, I think it makes sense to discuss and vote on the
> > naming of
> > >>> the product(s) of this project.
> > >>>
> > >>> Buried in another thread Alex remarked the following, which I think
> > is an
> > >>> excellent suggestion:
> > >>>
> > >>> "When we were discussing this earlier, we were discussing two
> > >>> IDE-friendly release
> > >>> artifacts, one designed for folks migrating from Apache Flex and
> > another
> > >>> for folks not interested in SWF.  In the packaging branch I have
> > most of
> > >>> that working.
> > >>>
> > >>> We were discussing calling the migration package 'FlexJS' and the
> > other one
> > >>> Royale or RoyaleJS.  The latter is considered by some folks to mean
> > "Royale
> > >>> for JS".  The package names would be apache-royale-flexjs-<version>
> > and
> > >>> maybe apache-royale-royalejs-<version>. The project name would
> > definitely
> > >>> be Royale but I think we want to have artifacts that denote target
> > >>> markets."
> > >>>
> > >>> A strong case has been made to leave off the "JS" off all but the
> > >>> legacy/migration package, which makes sense to me as well.
> > >>>
> > >>> I think there are plans to have this project create multiple
> > product (e.g.
> > >>> one that does AS3->WebAssembly), so I do not think that we should
> > name the
> > >>> current product 'Royale'. It will be increasingly confusing to have
> > a
> > >>> product with the same name as the project and then have other
> > products from
> > >>> the same project with totally different names. I suggest we come up
> > with a
> > >>> naming convention that will reflect the functionality of the
> > various
> > >>> products and their link to the project. E.g. (off the top of my
> > head, just
> > >>> to show what I mean): royale-as-js, royale-as-wasm, etc.
> > >>>
> > >>> What do you think?
> > >>>
> > >>> EdB
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Ix Multimedia Software
> > >>>
> > >>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
> > >>> 3521 VB Utrecht
> > >>>
> > >>> T. 06-51952295
> > >>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >>
> > >> <http://www.codeoscopic.com>
> > >>
> > >> Carlos Rovira
> > >>
> > >> Director General
> > >>
> > >> M: +34 607 22 60 05
> > >>
> > >> http://www.codeoscopic.com
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Conocenos Avant2 en 1 minuto! <https://avant2.es/#video>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede
> > contener
> > >> información privilegiada o confidencial. Si ha recibido este mensaje
> > por
> > >> error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma
> > vía y
> > >> proceda a su destrucción.
> > >>
> > >> De la vigente Ley Orgánica de Protección de Datos (15/1999), le
> > comunicamos
> > >> que sus datos forman parte de un fichero cuyo responsable es
> > CODEOSCOPIC
> > >> S.A. La finalidad de dicho tratamiento es facilitar la prestación
> > del
> > >> servicio o información solicitados, teniendo usted derecho de
> > acceso,
> > >> rectificación, cancelación y oposición de sus datos dirigiéndose a
> > nuestras
> > >> oficinas c/ Paseo de la Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid con la
> > documentación
> > >> necesaria.
>
>
>


-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

mobile: +48 880 859 557
skype: zarzycki10

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
<https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>

GitHub: https://github.com/piotrzarzycki21

Reply via email to