Okok, I thought we'll plan to go from 0.9 to 1.0, so in that case I see it normal Thanks Om
2017-11-12 10:14 GMT+01:00 Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com>: > We’ve fixed a lot of things since 0.8. > > 0.9 does not need to jump to 1.0. We can have 0.10 (and 0.11…) > > I’d really like to streamline the release process so it’s painless enough > to release every couple/few weeks. > > Harbs > > > On Nov 12, 2017, at 10:35 AM, Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > about version number, I'll feel more happy with 0.8 than 0.9 > > My point is that we are getting a first release of Royale and is the same > > that FlexJS 0.8 but with some new fixes and little things. > > As well I can see many things to do to reach 1.0, and would be great to > > have still an intermediate release 0.9 > > > > > > > > 2017-11-11 22:10 GMT+01:00 OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com>: > > > >> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> That might work. One question: we want the same bits that were > >> published > >>> as 0.9.0-rc1 to become the final bits where you would do: > >>> > >>> npm install -g apache-royale > >>> > >>> We aren't supposed to rebuild anything. For Maven the same bits from > >>> staging get copied to Maven central, for Ant/IDE the same bits are > moved > >>> (not copied) from dist/dev to dist/release. So is it true that the RM > >> can > >>> publish the final bits by taking the same bits that were once published > >>> via > >> > >> > >>> > >>> npm publish --tag 0.9.0-rc1 > >>> > >>> as the final release? What does the RM to do make that happen? Just: > >>> > >>> > >>> npm publish > >>> > >>> without any tag? > >>> > >> > >> The rc1 would be in the /dev/ area of the dist site. We will use a > >> useMirror=false flag while attempting to download the specified sdk. > This > >> will bypass the mirror urls and directly load it from the dist site. > >> > >> For the nightlies, it would be similar, except we can use the direct > url of > >> the lastSuccessfulArtifact directory in Jenkins. > >> > >> When the release candidate artifacts get promoted to GA, they will be > >> available via mirrors. So, we will push a new release to npm with the > new > >> version number, which simply is new package.json file with the correct > >> paths to the sdk artifacts. > >> > >> I plan to write a script called: publish-to-npm which can be invoked > like > >> this: > >> > >> ./publish-to-npm -- -nightly=true version=0.9.0 > >> ./publish-to-npm -- -rc=true version=0.9.0 > >> ./publish-to-npm -- -ga=true version=0.9.0 > >> > >> The script will take care of setting up the correct values in > package.json > >> and will publish it to npmjs.org. > >> > >> The values would be: > >> Nightly: > >> "royale_path_binary": " > >> http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/royale-asjs-jsonly/ > >> lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/out/ > >> ", > >> "royale_file_name": "apache-royale-jsonly-0.9.0-bin.zip", > >> "useMirror": false > >> > >> This will be published as: npm publish --tag nightly > >> > >> RC: > >> "royale_path_binary": " > >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/royale/sdk/0.9.0/rc1/";, > >> "royale_file_name": "apache-royale-jsonly-0.9.0-bin.zip", > >> "useMirror": false > >> > >> This will be published as: npm publish --tag 0.9.0-rc1 > >> > >> GA: > >> "royale_path_binary": "/dist/release/royale/sdk/0.9.0/", > >> "royale_file_name": "apache-royale-jsonly-0.9.0-bin.zip", > >> "useMirror": true > >> > >> This will be published as: npm publish > >> > >> When we move to the next version, we need to up the version number to > the > >> next one and push a nightly tag out. > >> P.S. All this assumes that there are no changes in the packaging logic. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Om > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Seems reasonable for the RM to have Node.js and npm installed. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> -Alex > >>> > >>> On 11/9/17, 6:28 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash > >> Muppirala" > >>> <omup...@gmail.com on behalf of bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>>> For staging builds, we could do : > >>>> > >>>> Publish: > >>>> npm publish --tag 0.9.0-rc1 > >>>> Install: > >>>> npm install -g apache-royale@0.9.0-rc1 > >>>> > >>>> For nightly builds > >>>> > >>>> Publish: > >>>> npm publish --tag nightly > >>>> Install: > >>>> npm install -g apache-royale@nightly > >>>> > >>>> Thoughts? > >>>> > >>>> BTW, if we want to integrate this as part of our release process, the > >>>> Release Manager will need to have node.js and npm installed as well. > >>>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Om > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> What would be great is, when we push artifacts to Maven staging repos > >>>>> and > >>>>> dist/dev, we also push something to wherever we need to push it so > npm > >>>>> works. Then we say in the vote emails: > >>>>> > >>>>> Maven: Use these staging 'coordinates' in your pom.xml > >>>>> Ant/IDE users: Get artifacts from dist.a.o/dev/royale > >>>>> NPM users: Run npm <whatever> > >>>>> > >>>>> But these may not be the final bits so we want to make sure folks > know > >>>>> that and that we can push final bits later. Then when the vote > >> finally > >>>>> passes, the RM pushes the Maven artifacts to Maven Central, the > >> Ant/IDE > >>>>> packages go to dist.a..o/release/royale and we do whatever is needed > >> for > >>>>> npm. > >>>>> > >>>>> Similarly, for nightly builds, we tell Maven users to use -SNAPSHOT > >>>>> versions, we tell Ant/IDE users to get it from apacheflexbuild. What > >>>>> can > >>>>> we tell npm users? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> -Alex > >>>>> > >>>>> On 11/9/17, 2:37 PM, "omup...@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash > >>>>> Muppirala" > >>>>> <omup...@gmail.com on behalf of bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid > >>> > >>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Can you remind me what the issues are with npm and nightly builds? > >>>>>>> IOW, I > >>>>>>> would think we would want to automate the generation of the HPM > >>>>> release > >>>>>>> so > >>>>>>> it can go out with the regular Apache release artifacts and be > >>>>> tested as > >>>>>>> an RC by release voters. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> I don't think there is any issue. Those who want to test out the > >>>>> nightly > >>>>>> via npm, need to a few special steps before they run npm install. > >> Josh > >>>>>> added that functionality a while ago. > >>>>>> We are talking about the official release so we can push the package > >>>>> out > >>>>>> to > >>>>>> the npm registry. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> We could also publish alpha/beta releases to npm as well. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> We already need to synchronize the generation and deployment of > >> Maven > >>>>>>> artifacts as well as the Ant/IDE artifacts. Can we add NPM as > >> well? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Yes, we should be able to incorporate an npm publish command into > our > >>>>>> release scripts. Do you know at what point in the whole release > >>>>> process > >>>>>> we > >>>>>> will be able to update npm? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> If we dont change the installation steps, we would need the > following > >>>>>> pieces in the package.json file: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> "org_apache_flex": { > >>>>>> "flexjs_path_binary": "flex/flexjs/0.8.0/binaries/", > >>>>>> "flexjs_file_name": "apache-flex-flexjs-0.8.0-bin.zip", > >>>>>> "falcon_path_binary": "flex/falcon/0.8.0/binaries/", > >>>>>> "falcon_file_name": "apache-flex-falconjx-0.8.0-bin.zip", > >>>>>> "flash_player_global_url": " > >>>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>> http%3A%2F%2Fdownload.m > >>>>>> acromedia.com%2Fget%2Fflashplayer%2Fupdaters%2F25% > >>>>> 2F&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cb85 > >>>>>> 038114e2f4ee32aba08d527c2918b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > >>>>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7 > >>>>>> C636458638974117812&sdata=Pf%2Fx4OLzd65wh8OEeXC8ALh3LE% > >>>>> 2BBvUQGD6Ksts2pl14% > >>>>>> 3D&reserved=0", > >>>>>> "flash_player_global_file_name": "playerglobal25_0.swc", > >>>>>> "adobe_air_url": > >>>>>> "https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>> http%3A%2F%2Fairdownlo > >>>>>> ad.adobe.com%2Fair%2Fwin%2Fdownload%2F25.0%2F&data=02% > >>>>> 7C01%7C%7Cb85038114e > >>>>>> 2f4ee32aba08d527c2918b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > >>>>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C636458 > >>>>>> 638974117812&sdata=dVNDap4qsl6i7zZ1uL% > 2FIiqKexCBpPPx86eqgDmslTPY%3D& > >>>>> reserv > >>>>>> ed=0", > >>>>>> "adobe_air_file_name": "AdobeAIRSDK.zip", > >>>>>> "player_version": "25.0", > >>>>>> "swf_version": "36", > >>>>>> "swf_object_url": > >>>>>> "https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>> http%3A%2F%2Fgithub.co > >>>>>> m%2Fswfobject%2Fswfobject%2Farchive%2F&data=02%7C01%7C% > >>>>> 7Cb85038114e2f4ee32 > >>>>>> aba08d527c2918b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > >>>>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6364586389741 > >>>>>> 17812&sdata=gWVzkp0ByA8WM8SUI4pbDOKgs5omcr > >>> VHBnIJsy2pfQU%3D&reserved=0", > >>>>>> "swf_object_file_name": "2.2.zip", > >>>>>> "flatui_url": > >>>>>> "https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>> https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.c > >>>>>> om%2Fdesignmodo%2FFlat-UI%2Farchive%2F&data=02%7C01%7C% > >>>>> 7Cb85038114e2f4ee32 > >>>>>> aba08d527c2918b%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > >>>>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6364586389741 > >>>>>> 17812&sdata=nD8nezQSa9GnubwK8frZlJepgEY7zf > >>> dCuMRqPbC3jqM%3D&reserved=0", > >>>>>> "flatui_file_name": "2.2.2.zip" > >>>>>> } > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Then, we up the version number and do a npm publish. The release > >>>>> manager > >>>>>> would need to have the credentials for npmjs.org, but we could > share > >>>>> that > >>>>>> with priv...@royale.apache.org > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>> Om > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -Alex > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 11/9/17, 1:28 PM, "Harbs" <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> OK. You’re probably right. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Nov 9, 2017, at 9:34 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala > >>>>>>> <bigosma...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Did you reserve the name yet? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> No I did not. If we are going to be using apache-royale as the > >>>>>>> package > >>>>>>>>> name, we should be fine. > >>>>>>>>> Unless you are worried someone else might claim it? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 9, 2017, at 9:25 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala > >>>>>>> <bigosma...@gmail.com > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Carlos Rovira > >>>>>>>>>>> <carlosrov...@apache.org> > >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Om, > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm working on the website content and want to know about NPM > >>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>> update > >>>>>>>>>>>> pages with real info. > >>>>>>>>>>>> could you share your plans about releasing Apache Royale in > >>>>> NPM? > >>>>>>>>>>>> I suppose you can't still make this due to some final > >> renaming? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Let me know in order to remove this info if you think we'll > >>>>> need > >>>>>>> more > >>>>>>>>>> time > >>>>>>>>>>>> to get Royale on NPM > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks! > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I was hoping to release the npm version right after we do the > >>>>> first > >>>>>>>>>> release > >>>>>>>>>>> of royale. Does that work? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>> Om > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-10-30 19:57 GMT+01:00 Carlos Rovira > >>>>>>>>>>>> <carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com > >>>>>>>>>>> : > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I think apache-royals would be better, since avoids > >> confusing > >>>>>>>>>>>>> people. > >>>>>>>>>> If > >>>>>>>>>>>> I > >>>>>>>>>>>>> came to this project for the first time, and try to search > >> in > >>>>>>> npm, > >>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>> find > >>>>>>>>>>>>> "royale", although this was the right and only package, I'll > >>>>> be > >>>>>>> ask > >>>>>>>>>>>>> me > >>>>>>>>>> if > >>>>>>>>>>>>> there's the right one. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> With apache-royale, there's no confusion problems ;) > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-10-30 19:50 GMT+01:00 OmPrakash Muppirala > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <bigosma...@gmail.com>: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We always have option of using apache-royale as package > >> name. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Harbs > >>>>> <harbs.li...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It’s a shame that “royale” seems to already be taken on > >> npm. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I would vote for two packages: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. To install *everything* (i.e. swf, js, node, etc. and > >>>>> future > >>>>>>>>>>>> targets > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when/if we add them): > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> npm install apache-royale -g > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. To install js-only: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> npm install apache-royale-js -g > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we see a demand for further packages (i.e. compiler > >>>>> only), > >>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can > >>>>>>>>>>>> add > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them as additional packages later. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Harbs > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 30, 2017, at 8:23 PM, OmPrakash Muppirala < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bigosma...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, "npm install" downloads a tarball from npmjs.org. > >> The > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> package > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contains the code we want others to use. It also > >> contains > >>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "package.json" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file which specify all its dependencies. These > >>>>> dependencies > >>>>>>> (and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> their > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sub-dependencies) are all downloaded from npmjs.org as > >>> part > >>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "npm > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> install". > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There are options to run custom scripts before and after > >>>>> the > >>>>>>> npm > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> install. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In the case of FlexJS, we run a script afterwards that > >>>>> simply > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> downloads > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> non-npmjs.org dependencies (royale sdk, fonts, flash > >>>>> player, > >>>>>>> air, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> etc.) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> puts them in the correct places. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, our options are: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Publish two different packages on npmjs.org: jsonly > >>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> js+swf. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to figure out the names of these packages, since > >> they > >>>>> are > >>>>>>>>>>>> unique > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> identifiers on npmjs's registry. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then the command the users would run would look like: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> npm install royale-jsonly -g > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> npm install royale-js-and-swf -g > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Publish only the jsonly package. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then the command the users would run would look like: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> npm install royale-jsonly -g > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Possibly, we can figure out a way to optionally > >>>>> download > >>>>>>> swf > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> support. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This way, by default the jsonly is downoaded and > >> unzipped. > >>>>>>> Then > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> could > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (possibly) look at the args or have the user run another > >>>>>>> command > >>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> downloads the swf support. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then the command the users would run would (possibly) > >> look > >>>>>>> like: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> npm install royale -- -include-swf-support -g > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (or) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> npm install royale-jsonly -g > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and then > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ./update-royale-include-swf-support > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In all three cases, we can definitely run a script that > >>>>> alters > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> xml > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> configs, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> etc. to suit our needs. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hope that helps. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Om > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Alex Harui > >>>>>>>>>>>> <aha...@adobe.com.invalid > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Om, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can you explain to us what our options are? > >> Essentially, > >>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>>> JS-only > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> package will be a subset of a package that can output > >> both > >>>>>>> SWF > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>> JS > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will probably have slightly different default settings > >> in, > >>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> example, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frameworks/royale-config.xml file. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is looking like we can create a zip package for > >> JS-only > >>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>> will > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> work > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Moonshine and VSCode, but to fully make it work in > >>>>> Flash > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Builder > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe some other IDEs) you will need to run a script of > >>>>> some > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sort > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes up some FB launch configurations that convert Flex > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> projects > >>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Royale projects. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The current plan for a "FlexJS" package that has SWF > >>>>> support > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> users > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that want use SWF for testing or as a migration step) > >> will > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> require > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> users unzip a package and run an Ant script to bring > >> down > >>>>>>> Adobe > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies. I'm thinking we won't use the Flex > >>>>> installer. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm still working through why one of our users isn't > >>>>> getting > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> completion working in FB and the answer there may affect > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> packaging > >>>>>>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know NPM well enough to have an opinion on, if > >> we > >>>>>>>>>>>> distribute > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> two > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> packages (flexjs-with-swf-support and js-only), whether > >>>>> NPM > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allows > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> us to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have two different packages or whether it is better to > >>>>>>> structure > >>>>>>>>>>>> NPM > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> releases as js-only package and a swf-support-add-on > >>>>> package. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I also don't know if the NPM install should run a script > >>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fixes > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> up > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> those launch configs. Maybe it is better to continue to > >>>>>>> leave > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "FB > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> users have to run this additional Ant script" or > >> something > >>>>>>> like > >>>>>>>>>>>> that. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not sure how important FB still is to our > >>>>> ease-of-migration > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> story. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe showing us what folks would have to type on the > >>>>> command > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> line > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> might > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> help us form opinions. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Alex > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/30/17, 4:36 AM, "carlos.rov...@gmail.com on > >> behalf > >>>>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carlos > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rovira" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <carlos.rov...@gmail.com on behalf of > >>>>>>>>>>>> carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Om, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that would be great! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If we end having multiple products as Alex suggested, I > >>>>>>> think > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> should > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have as well multiple NPM installs. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So for me is ok to sync products we deliver with NPM > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> installations > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flavors > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2017-10-30 10:58 GMT+01:00 Yishay Weiss > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <yishayj...@hotmail.com>: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You’re likely to do most of the maintenance work, so > >>>>> it’s > >>>>>>> up > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> you… > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> far as users go there are some users writing client > >>>>> code in > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AIR > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> code in node (in fact I’m involved in such a project > >>>>> right > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> now). > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn’t make sweeping assumptions. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: omup...@gmail.com <omup...@gmail.com> on behalf > >>> of > >>>>>>>>>>>> OmPrakash > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2017 10:21:37 AM > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: dev@royale.apache.org > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Publishing royale to npm > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 1:19 AM, Harbs > >>>>>>> <harbs.li...@gmail.com > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why not publish both versions? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It looks like the js only is going to be just a zip > >>>>> file. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> makes > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> easy maintenance. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The swf version has a bunch of dependencies to be > >>>>>>> downloaded. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not a big deal, just thinking out loud if we really > >>>>> need to > >>>>>>>>>>>> publish > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different packages that might lead to confusion. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm open to both, though. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Om > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 30, 2017, at 10:15 AM, OmPrakash Muppirala < > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bigosma...@gmail.com> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was wondering if we should publish the > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> apache.royale-jsonly > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> verson > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> via > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> npm instead of the full version with swf support. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After all, users coming in vial npm would most > >> likely > >>>>> not > >>>>>>>>>>>> expect > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> swf > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> support. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on this proposal? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Om > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http%3A%2F%2Fwww.codeo > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> scopic.com&data=02%7C01%7C% > >>> 7C5f3b122f189e4e0f119b08d51f8a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 81b0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636449602097009881& > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sdata=wZgQd0X2xX6ed8y0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> t4O87r66gMlVy%2F8aHqtpwnq8O6w%3D&reserved=0> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carlos Rovira > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Director General > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> M: +34 607 22 60 05 <607%2022%2060%2005> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http%3A%2F%2Fwww.codeos > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> copic.com&data=02%7C01%7C% > >> 7C5f3b122f189e4e0f119b08d51f8a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 81b0%7Cfa7b1b5a7b3 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636449602097009881& > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sdata=wZgQd0X2xX6ed8y0t > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4O87r66gMlVy%2F8aHqtpwnq8O6w%3D&reserved=0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Conocenos Avant2 en 1 minuto! > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https%3A%2F%2Favant2.e > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> s%2F%23video&data=02%7C01%7C%7C5f3b122f189e4e0f119b08d51f8a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 81b0%7Cfa7b1b5a > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636449602097009881& > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sdata=JK22xVqobAGGnZ > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> b8laWESXHS3NA5nLdscBYTEHml7Pk%3D&reserved=0> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook. > >>> com/?url=https%3A%2F%2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Fna01.safelinks.protection.outlook&data=02% > >>> 7C01%7C%7Cb6a2094e11dd > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 4e4c496708d527e2d4eb%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de > >>> cee1%7C0%7C0%7 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> C636458777567763335&sdata=VO2yh0RARZiWr4jYbPz8nfsyzyCG2O > >>> a2KQ%2Blj > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2z%2FLIM%3D&reserved=0. > >>>>> com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fww > >>>>>>>>>>>>> w > >>>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>>>>>> codeoscopic.com&data=02%7C01%7C% > >> 7Cbbcc4f094aec46c8cac208d527b8 > >>>>>>> d535%7C > >>>>>>>>>>>>> fa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0% > >>>>>>> 7C636458597162582230&sdata=% > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2BGs4UwGYO8XA6Ca3DU15tlSm3DZL3j4Jz9bXSVtkRu4%3D&reserved=0> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Carlos Rovira > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Director General > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> M: +34 607 22 60 05 <607%2022%2060%2005> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>>>> http%3A%2F%2Fwww.c > >>>>>>>>>>>>> odeoscopic.com&data=02%7C01%7C% > >> 7Cbbcc4f094aec46c8cac208d527b8 > >>>>>>> d535%7Cf > >>>>>>>>>>>>> a7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0% > >>>>>>> 7C636458597162582230&sdata=%2 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> BGs4UwGYO8XA6Ca3DU15tlSm3DZL3j4Jz9bXSVtkRu4%3D&reserved=0 > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Conocenos Avant2 en 1 minuto! > >>>>>>>>>>>>> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>>>> https%3A%2F%2Fava > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> nt2.es%2F%23video&data=02%7C01%7C% > 7Cbbcc4f094aec46c8cac208d527b8 > >>>>>>> d535% > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0% > >>>>>>> 7C636458597162582230&sdata > >>>>>>>>>>>>> =Il0uAApioVX8s%2FGpLF6I7n3Z9RVE6lr% > >>> 2F2DRXoDPhY7M%3D&reserved=0> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> 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. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>>> Carlos Rovira > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url= > >>>>> http%3A%2F%2Fabou > >>>>>>>>>>>> t > >>>>>>> . > >>>>>>>>>>>> me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7C% > >>> 7Cbbcc4f094aec46c8cac208d527b8 > >>>>>>> d535%7 > >>>>>>>>>>>> Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0% > >>>>>>> 7C636458597162582230&sdata=9 > >>>>>>>>>>>> %2FYyqi%2BYg77E%2FcoGt9naXIx24oJV3uK2fwbRB7Ef1 > >> Ec%3D&reserved=0 > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Carlos Rovira > > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > -- Carlos Rovira http://about.me/carlosrovira
