Alex, slightly OT, but in terms of coordination: fyi I am also very close to merging the language improvements branch into develop. As I already mentioned elsewhere, I was hoping to do that a couple of days back, but some recent things also took me a little longer than expected (I have additional local changes/fixes not yet in remote branch) . I was planning to merge that today also.
However, I will wait until after your merge, so I'm hoping you can get yours in today (if not, I will wait). I will probably put mine in as a squashed commit after yours. On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 6:05 AM Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Alex, > > Many thanks for that! I will try to be RM. I will have some dedicated time > for that. I will wait for your instruction and merge to develop. > > Thanks, > Piotr > > > On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 7:31 PM Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote: > > > Well, that turned out to be much more time-consuming than I expected, but > > we can now create identical release artifacts on Mac and Win. I am > hopeful > > this effort will pay off not only now in having other folks generate > > releases, but also in the future if signed binaries become a requirement. > > > > There continues to be a lot of distractions in my life that can cause > > delays, but I hope to merge the release_practice branches into develop > over > > the next day or two and figure out where in the wiki to document the > > release process. So, now is the time for one or more people to step up > to > > be the RMs for 0.9.6 and help debug and improve the process. > > > > I am going to try very hard not to "own" the process. If something goes > > wrong, I am going to ask others to try to debug and fix it first because > it > > is in the project's best interests for others to truly understand how > this > > stuff works. > > > > Thanks, > > -Alex > > > > On 5/23/19, 9:54 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> wrote: > > > > It has turned out to be harder than expected to get the same binaries > > on Mac and Win. I now have the identical binaries for royale-compiler > and > > royale-typedefs Maven artifacts and am starting on royale-asjs. I might > > get lucky and the changes that fixed royale-typedefs SWCs will magically > > get the royale-asjs SWCs to match. Then we have to make the Ant > artifacts > > match. > > > > There have been a lot of distractions in my non-work life which has > > also impeded progress. I hope to make much progress this coming week and > > if we're lucky, I will be asking for a volunteer (or volunteers) to test > > drive all of this stuff and be the RM for 0.9.6. I am not going to be > the > > RM. > > > > -Alex > > > > On 5/23/19, 9:39 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > It's been a while since you have started effort with automating > > build. > > Where are you with that ? Are we closer to started 0.9.6. Do you > > need any > > help with this ? > > > > Thanks, > > Piotr > > > > wt., 2 kwi 2019 o 19:30 Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> > > napisał(a): > > > > > Update: > > > > > > In order to make verification of binary release packages > created > > on the > > > server easier, I have made changes to our build scripts and > > tools to try to > > > generate reproducible binaries. I've seen two different builds > > compare on > > > my Mac. The next challenge will be to see if the server can > > build a > > > package on Windows that will compare on Mac. > > > > > > One of the changes I needed to make is to JBurg. The version > of > > JBurg we > > > use generates method names including a hash that doesn't > > reproduce the same > > > name each time. I have changes to JBurg ready, however JBurg > is > > currently > > > under CPL which is category B. We only need one file, we don't > > need or > > > want all of JBurg at this time. The one JBurg file is jointly > > owned by > > > Adobe and Tom Harwood. I've contact Tom and he will be filing > > an ICLA and > > > has given me permission to commit the lines he owns in that one > > file. > > > > > > This is the revision of the file that will be donated by > > Tom/Adobe. > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2Fp%2Fjburg%2Fcode%2Fci%2F66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff%2Ftree%2Fsrc%2Fgenerator%2Fjburg%2Fburg%2FJBurgGenerator.java&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656&sdata=XMDpGg0yPP530enC02eH8CQXf66Lsn97FFaqHxJaaio%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > Once this file goes in with the changes to keep the method > names > > the same, > > > there will be more tweaks to the release tasks and then we can > > try cutting > > > a release. I'm thinking we'll be at that point in early May, > so > > now is the > > > time to get stuff in for the 0.9.6 release. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -Alex > > > > > > On 3/8/19, 9:27 AM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > > I would much rather have others find and fix issues > > themselves. That > > > way, more people than just me will know how to maintain the > > system. It > > > actually turns out that, IMO, a group of people can work on the > > release. > > > There are 14 steps. Literally, 14 different people could > > execute one step > > > each. > > > > > > My 2 cents, > > > -Alex > > > > > > On 3/8/19, 2:13 AM, "Carlos Rovira" < > carlosrov...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > amazing work! congrats to reach to this point! :) > > > > > > I need to put my head on all of this, but count on me > to > > be a RM. > > > I think > > > the best thing should be that you be the first RM to > try > > your own > > > development at least for the first time, and then the > > rest of us > > > will > > > follow you on the next releases. With all this on place > > we maybe > > > could > > > release once a month or every two months... > > > > > > Thanks for doing this :) > > > > > > Carlos > > > > > > > > > El vie., 8 mar. 2019 a las 1:55, Alex Harui > > > (<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>) > > > escribió: > > > > > > > OK, I've now seen Jenkins perform the steps to build > > the release > > > > artifacts. Folks interested in Docker-izing the > steps > > are > > > welcome to look > > > > at the jobs on the "Royale Release" tab on the CI > > server. > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com%3A8080%2Fview%2FRoyale%2520Release%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656&sdata=ag8xFP8FhC0ndIumEhlwAKTNImbUy3vLwVGYWiK0a68%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > These steps assume that the RM can run the basic > Maven > > and Ant > > > build on > > > > the RM's computer. I think that's a fair requirement > > since all > > > of us on the > > > > PMC need to able to do that to build the RC in order > > to vote on > > > it. > > > > Jenkins does other tasks like run the Maven release > > plugin > > > steps. > > > > > > > > Currently that results in binaries on Jenkins that > are > > > downloaded to the > > > > RM's computer. These binaries need to be verified by > > the RM > > > which is the > > > > next phase I will be starting on now. The RM > verifies > > the bits > > > and then > > > > PGP signs them. And then the bits are uploaded off > > the RM's > > > computer to > > > > Maven Staging or dist.a.o/dev. If that uploading > > turns out to > > > be a point > > > > of failure, we have the option of having Jenkins > > upload the big > > > files and > > > > have the RM only upload PGP signature files. Or > > finding a way > > > for Jenkins > > > > to get the signature files from the RM. The uploads > > worked fine > > > for me, > > > > but then again, so did the old script's uploads. > > > > > > > > Therefore, once I get the binary verification phase > > completed, I > > > think > > > > someone other than me should be the RM and try to use > > these > > > steps to > > > > generate the release and help debug the process for > > the next > > > RM. So, > > > > please try to carve out some time to be the RM. One > > advantage > > > of doing > > > > most of the work on Jenkins is that it frees up my > > computer to > > > do other > > > > things while Jenkins is cranking away. > > > > > > > > I think we're at least a week away from binary > > verification, > > > maybe two, so > > > > it is time to start thinking about what is going in > > this release. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > On 3/7/19, 4:15 PM, "Alex Harui" > > <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > In case you haven't guessed, I'm testing out > > Jenkins and its > > > ability > > > > to create the artifacts and send emails. Please > > ignore any > > > email that > > > > looks like a vote or discuss thread. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > On 2/10/19, 8:44 PM, "Alex Harui" > > <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Om, > > > > > > > > Well, that's what I used for the last > > release. I'm sure > > > there is > > > > probably some inaccuracy in it. > > > > > > > > That said, I'm abandoning that document and > > taking a new > > > angle > > > > because that document presumed that the release > > manager was > > > trying to > > > > create a release on his/her computer. I've given up > > on that and > > > working on > > > > making releases from a shared computer for the > reasons > > I've > > > stated > > > > upthread. I hope to make some progress on that this > > week. > > > > > > > > The key difference is that the new angle does > > not > > > presume that you > > > > have Git SSH and PGP signatures all set up on some > > computer. I > > > have not > > > > looked into how Docker would handle that. You > > certainly > > > wouldn't want the > > > > Docker image to contain your SSH or PGP keys/creds. > > And if the > > > Docker > > > > image doesn't, then that is another stumbling block > > for future > > > RMs. > > > > > > > > The other key difference is that the old > > script presumed > > > you could > > > > create the 3 release in 3 huge "easy" steps. We've > > seen that is > > > only true > > > > for me. So the new angle creates many discrete steps > > managed by > > > Jenkins. > > > > > > > > So, it is up to you to decide what you want > to > > > "Docker-ize". You > > > > can try to Docker-ize the current 3 big steps, so RMs > > can try to > > > run it on > > > > their systems, but I'd bet they will just faiI due to > > network > > > issues. I > > > > would be interested in using Docker to make each of > > these many > > > discrete > > > > steps portable to another server. I'm not going to > > involve > > > Docker at this > > > > point. My main goal is just to see if I can create a > > workflow > > > of many > > > > discrete steps that isn't horribly painful. Once we > > see what > > > these steps > > > > turn out to be, then we can worry about server > > portability of > > > those steps. > > > > > > > > Either way, we want to know about running > > > Browser+Selenium for > > > > sure. And maybe FlashPlayerDebugger or AIR. I would > > want to > > > know, for > > > > example, how you debug a failing checkintest in a > > Docker > > > container. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > On 2/10/19, 5:18 PM, "OmPrakash Muppirala" < > > > bigosma...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Alex, > > > > > > > > Just to be clear, I am following the > steps > > from here > > > to try > > > > and setup a > > > > docker container. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Froyale-asjs%2Fwiki%2FRelease-Manager-Notes&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656&sdata=JfJSK%2B4xchkDWpv78GpWtFlVMQ%2BoUAE10rv7HdeCZck%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > > > Is this doc up to date? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Om > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:02 PM OmPrakash > > Muppirala < > > > > bigosma...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > One approach is to have each step in > the > > process > > > spin up a > > > > docker image. > > > > > And use docker-compose to run each > > step. All the > > > images can > > > > be made to > > > > > share a common volume where all the > > artifacts are > > > stored > > > > across steps. > > > > > > > > > > You are right about the networking > issue > > though. > > > Any > > > > network related > > > > > failure that occurs on the host machine > > will most > > > likely > > > > occur in the > > > > > docker container. Although, I am not > > clear how we > > > can > > > > guarantee that the > > > > > same issues will not occur on the > > Jenkins server. > > > I mean, > > > > what is special > > > > > about the Jenkins server that makes it > > immune to > > > these > > > > networking issues? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Om > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 11:48 AM Alex > > Harui > > > > <aha...@adobe.com.invalid> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Again, I don't know anything about > > Docker, but > > > before we > > > > spend a lot of > > > > >> time on Docker, I also want to point > > out that the > > > process > > > > to create a > > > > >> release cannot really be thought of as > > "one > > > application". > > > > It will be a > > > > >> series of "steps" to run. How many > > steps > > > depends on > > > > whether we think we > > > > >> can isolate enough stuff via Docker to > > be able to > > > run > > > > Docker on the RM's > > > > >> computer instead of some shared > > computer. On a > > > shared > > > > computer there will > > > > >> be dozens of steps because the RM will > > need to > > > enter > > > > passwords to commit > > > > >> stuff. On a local computer I guess > the > > RM can > > > supply > > > > passwords but I think > > > > >> there will be stopping points where > the > > Maven > > > artifacts are > > > > deployed and > > > > >> the staging repo is closed, and > another > > stopping > > > point for > > > > the vote. It > > > > >> seems like Docker works by downloading > > > dependencies. Given > > > > that the > > > > >> problem the RMs had last time involved > > downloads > > > and > > > > uploads, why do we > > > > >> think Docker will really solve this > for > > creating > > > releases > > > > on local machines? > > > > >> > > > > >> The reason to do this on a shared > > machine is so > > > that new > > > > RMs don't have > > > > >> to do as much setup. But then I > wonder > > about the > > > > efficiency of kicking off > > > > >> that many Docker images. Jenkins can > > manage that > > > already. > > > > Does Docker > > > > >> have some sort of similar Dashboard or > > would we > > > use Jenkins > > > > to kick off > > > > >> Docker steps? I can't quite picture > > what is the > > > outermost > > > > >> control/dashboard. > > > > >> > > > > >> -Alex > > > > >> > > > > >> On 2/6/19, 11:03 AM, "Harbs" < > > > harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> A quick search turns up this: > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testing&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656&sdata=FUYuwlg6rT8EgffgT3QoP8YWcyzjXxNdrT8aN0jq1H4%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> < > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcodingsans.com%2Fblog%2Fselenium-with-docker-testing&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656&sdata=FUYuwlg6rT8EgffgT3QoP8YWcyzjXxNdrT8aN0jq1H4%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-docker&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656&sdata=T4QPL4Hh552jE67uYLU1Xu2hDv61NLfuk4u2V6GS%2Bek%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> < > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.blazemeter.com%2Fblog%2Fhow-to-run-selenium-tests-in-docker&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686158656&sdata=T4QPL4Hh552jE67uYLU1Xu2hDv61NLfuk4u2V6GS%2Bek%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-selenium&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686168650&sdata=3r1pbB7qdx%2FQUpas%2FyQFs4ICsZUF7vBemIOm%2FArz6ZM%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> < > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-selenium&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686168650&sdata=3r1pbB7qdx%2FQUpas%2FyQFs4ICsZUF7vBemIOm%2FArz6ZM%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Feb 6, 2019, at 8:59 PM, Alex > > Harui > > > > <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Thanks for volunteering to try > it > > Om. IMO, > > > even more > > > > important > > > > >> than Firefox+Flash is > > SomeBrowser+Selenium. We > > > may also > > > > need to run Adobe > > > > >> AIR's adb. We could probably turn off > > the Flash > > > tests or > > > > replace Flash > > > > >> with AIR. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Thanks, > > > > >> > -Alex > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On 2/6/19, 10:54 AM, "Carlos > > Rovira" < > > > > carlosrov...@apache.org> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Hi Om, that would be great! > > waiting for > > > your > > > > experience with a > > > > >> that! :) > > > > >> > > > > > >> > El mié., 6 feb. 2019 a las > > 19:31, > > > OmPrakash > > > > Muppirala (< > > > > >> bigosma...@gmail.com>) > > > > >> > escribió: > > > > >> > > > > > >> >> Yes, I agree with Alex about > not > > being > > > able to run > > > > UI out of docker > > > > >> >> containers. I never thought of > > the > > > checkintests > > > > when I made the > > > > >> >> suggestion. > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> The firefox-flash image that > > Yishay > > > pointed out > > > > looks promising. > > > > >> I will > > > > >> >> poke around with it and see if > > that works > > > for us. > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> Thanks, > > > > >> >> Om > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 at 12:41 AM > > Yishay > > > Weiss < > > > > >> yishayj...@hotmail.com> > > > > >> >> wrote: > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >>> I’ll let Om or someone else > > with docker > > > experience > > > > tell us if > > > > >> this [1] is > > > > >> >>> relevant. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> [1] > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhub.docker.com%2Fr%2Fbeli%2Ffirefox-flash%2F&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686168650&sdata=t1ZG3j7i5LnUTpdSEW78jLfn4K3gIDLnhpJNeaonTjg%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > ________________________________ > > > > >> >>> From: Alex Harui > > <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID > > > > > > > > >> >>> Sent: Wednesday, February 6, > > 2019 > > > 10:05:54 AM > > > > >> >>> To: dev@royale.apache.org > > > > >> >>> Subject: Re: 0.9.6 Release > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> I don't anything about docker, > > but in 15 > > > minutes of > > > > reading I ran > > > > >> into > > > > >> >>> this: > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.channelfutures.com%2Fopen-source%2Fwhen-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containers&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686168650&sdata=ZOuiuLuyYx1I5w2expOtx1tGxDXIQqnKcSoFYUNkZeA%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> Which says: Docker can't " Run > > > applications with > > > > graphical > > > > >> interfaces". > > > > >> >>> If you want Royale to use > > Docker for > > > releases, show > > > > that it can > > > > >> run > > > > >> >>> checkintests with Flash and > the > > Browser. > > > Then I > > > > will look into > > > > >> it more. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> The highest level goal is to > > make it as > > > easy as > > > > possible for > > > > >> someone to > > > > >> >>> volunteer to be an RM. Any > > requirement > > > of "install > > > > this (Docker, > > > > >> etc) on > > > > >> >>> your computer" is, IMO, > another > > barrier > > > to entry. > > > > Yeah, RMs will > > > > >> have to > > > > >> >>> have Maven installed and maybe > > Ant, but > > > you should > > > > already have > > > > >> those > > > > >> >>> installed to be a > committer/PMC > > member. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> That said, a good takeaway > from > > the > > > Docker idea is > > > > to try to find > > > > >> a way > > > > >> >> to > > > > >> >>> make an "Image" of whatever we > > end up > > > with on > > > > whatever server we > > > > >> end up > > > > >> >>> using so if the image can be > > copied and > > > used on > > > > other servers. > > > > >> I'm not > > > > >> >>> exactly sure how to do that > > with Azure, > > > which hosts > > > > my CI > > > > >> server. I will > > > > >> >>> spend a few more minutes > > researching that. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> I could not quickly find any > > way to get a > > > free VM > > > > on Azure or AWS > > > > >> that > > > > >> >>> isn't a > > > free-trial-start-paying-after-a-year. So, > > > > unless someone > > > > >> comes > > > > >> >> up > > > > >> >>> with a free server we can use > > "forever", > > > I'm going > > > > to just start > > > > >> with my > > > > >> >>> Azure VM. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> -Alex > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> On 2/5/19, 10:59 PM, "Carlos > > Rovira" < > > > > carlosrov...@apache.org> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> Hi. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> the plan sounds very good > to > > me. Just > > > my 2 > > > > thoughts on this: > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> 1.- As I was reading I was > > thinking as > > > well on > > > > something like > > > > >> Docker > > > > >> >>> and > > > > >> >>> see Om as well thinking on > > the same. > > > Maybe is > > > > the way to this > > > > >> with > > > > >> >> the > > > > >> >>> actual technology. Seems > VMs > > are > > > stepping out a > > > > bit this days > > > > >> in > > > > >> >> favor > > > > >> >>> of > > > > >> >>> things like Docker. Maybe > > the same did > > > Git over > > > > Svn, and today > > > > >> Svn is > > > > >> >>> an > > > > >> >>> old remembrance. I must say > > that I > > > have no > > > > experience with > > > > >> Docker, so > > > > >> >>> doing > > > > >> >>> that will require acquire > > that > > > knowledge, but > > > > seems it could > > > > >> be worth > > > > >> >>> it. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> 2.- Maybe is not possible, > > but I want > > > to propose > > > > to do this > > > > >> work I a > > > > >> >>> separate branch, so it > could > > be in > > > parallel to > > > > other > > > > >> developments. I > > > > >> >>> think > > > > >> >>> work over develop is > > practical if > > > there's > > > > something tiny that > > > > >> could > > > > >> >> be > > > > >> >>> done > > > > >> >>> in a commit. But as we need > > more than > > > one, or is > > > > a long > > > > >> process (like > > > > >> >>> this), chances are to make > > develop > > > branch > > > > unstable and even > > > > >> for some > > > > >> >>> days. > > > > >> >>> I think we should try to > > avoid that > > > scenario, > > > > and branches are > > > > >> the > > > > >> >> best > > > > >> >>> way. If we do this way, > > we'll benefit > > > of more > > > > reliable develop > > > > >> >> branch. > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> Thanks and good to know of > > this plan :) > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> Carlos > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>> El mar., 5 feb. 2019 a las > > 23:19, > > > Harbs (< > > > > >> harbs.li...@gmail.com>) > > > > >> >>> escribió: > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >>>> I’ve never used Docker > myself, > > but that > > > might be a > > > > good plan. > > > > >> >>>> > > > > >> >>>>> On Feb 6, 2019, at 12:07 AM, > > OmPrakash > > > Muppirala < > > > > >> >>> bigosma...@gmail.com> > > > > >> >>>> wrote: > > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> I was wondering if we can > use > > docker > > > images to > > > > setup and seal > > > > >> the > > > > >> >>> RM > > > > >> >>>>> environment. Then other RMs > > simply > > > need to run > > > > the image > > > > >> locally > > > > >> >>> and run > > > > >> >>>>> the release scripts. Might > > be easier. > > > If folks > > > > like this plan, > > > > >> >> I > > > > >> >>> can > > > > >> >>>> try > > > > >> >>>>> to put something together. > > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> Thanks, > > > > >> >>>>> Om > > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 1:40 > > PM Harbs < > > > > harbs.li...@gmail.com> > > > > >> >>> wrote: > > > > >> >>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>> In a recent discussion, it > > looks like > > > other > > > > projects have > > > > >> gotten > > > > >> >>>> resources > > > > >> >>>>>> from AWS. > > > > >> >>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>> Whatever service we use, > > could setup a > > > “shared” > > > > Royale account > > > > >> >>> that all > > > > >> >>>>>> PMC members could have > > access to. > > > > >> >>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>> I don’t know if there’s > some > > way we > > > could > > > > leverage Gitlab’s > > > > >> >>> integration > > > > >> >>>>>> pipelines > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.gitlab.com%2Fee%2Fci%2FREADME.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686168650&sdata=nfhbWtXmtxNEITbNNH4pvU37rQo6glA2VUBJFPC1Flg%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> >>> < > > > > >> >>>>>> > > > > >> >>> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.gitlab.com%2Fee%2Fci%2FREADME.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C0f33e0555f7f4b92400e08d6df9f50ce%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636942272686168650&sdata=nfhbWtXmtxNEITbNNH4pvU37rQo6glA2VUBJFPC1Flg%3D&reserved=0 > > > > >> >>>> > > > > >> >>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 11:33 > > PM, Alex > > > Harui > > > > >> >> <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID > > > > >> >>>> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote: > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Well, the big hole in this > > plan is > > > that I think > > > > we have to use > > > > >> >>>> someone's > > > > >> >>>>>> personal VM account (in > this > > case, > > > mine). I > > > > can't think of a > > > > >> >> way > > > > >> >>> we can > > > > >> >>>>>> run interactive commands > > like git push > > > on builds@. > > > > But that > > > > >> >>> reminds me > > > > >> >>>>>> to go see what are current > > options are > > > for > > > > free/cheap compute > > > > >> >>> servers. > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On 2/5/19, 1:20 PM, "Piotr > > Zarzycki" < > > > > >> >> piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> > > > > >> >>>> wrote: > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>> Sounds like best plan > > ever. Using > > > the same PC > > > > by everyone is > > > > >> >>> awesome! > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019, 8:39 > > PM Harbs < > > > > harbs.li...@gmail.com > > > > >> >>> wrote: > > > > >> >>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> A big +1 from me! > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Looking forward! > > > > >> >>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On Feb 5, 2019, at 9:34 > > PM, Alex > > > Harui > > > > >> >>> <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID> > > > > >> >>>>>> wrote: > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Hi, > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> We are coming up on 3 > > months since > > > 0.9.4. I > > > > have finished > > > > >> >> the > > > > >> >>>> changes > > > > >> >>>>>>>> to get production Royale > > modules to > > > work in > > > > Tour De Flex. > > > > >> >> Lots > > > > >> >>> of > > > > >> >>>> other > > > > >> >>>>>>>> good changes have been > > contributed. > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> > > > > >> >>>>>>>>> There were emails around > > the 0.9.4 > > > release > > > > about others > > > > >> >>> stepping up > > > > >> >>>> to > > > > >> >>>>>>>> cut the next release, but > > that hasn't > > > > happened. I tried and > > > > >> >>> failed to > > > > >> >>>>>> get > > > > >> >>>>>>>> Apache Infra to allow us > > to run our > > > release > > > > packaging on the > > > > >> >>> Jenkins > > > > >> >>>>>>>> servers. They felt there > > were too > > > many > > > > security concerns > > > > >> with > > > > >
