I think that version of JS Only SDK was tested with Flash Builder and
Moonshine IDE, but I'm not sure whether anyone is tried it to with VSCode.

Piotr

2017-10-05 13:17 GMT+02:00 Piotr Zarzycki <[email protected]>:

> Actually not. I think you should be able use those version without any
> additional steps.
>
> Piotr
>
> 2017-10-05 13:11 GMT+02:00 Idylog - Nicolas Granon <[email protected]>:
>
>> Should I launch :
>> ant -f installer.xml
>> after unzipping n a folder ?
>>
>> Nicolas Granon
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Message d'origine-----
>> > De : Piotr Zarzycki [mailto:[email protected]]
>> > Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 22:55
>> > À : [email protected]
>> > Objet : Re: [Royale] Using nightly builds
>> >
>> > Good Luck! :)
>> >
>> > Piotr
>> >
>> > 2017-10-04 22:53 GMT+02:00 Idylog - Nicolas Granon
>> > <[email protected]>:
>> >
>> > > 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:[email protected]]
>> > > > Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 20:59 À : [email protected];
>> > > > [email protected] Objet : 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
>> > > > <[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
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> mobile: +48 880 859 557 <+48%20880%20859%20557>
> skype: zarzycki10
>
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
> <https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>
>
> GitHub: https://github.com/piotrzarzycki21
>



-- 

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