Hi Greg,
It turns out I have a "split shift" today. I'm stopping work for the next 7 or
8 hours then will get around to the merge. So if you can get your changes
merged in that amount of time, then I will wait for you and deal with any merge
conflicts (there are almost certain to be some).
-Alex
On 6/10/19, 11:46 AM, "Greg Dove" <greg.d...@gmail.com> wrote:
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://sourceforge.net/p/jburg/code/ci/66c287943376a74ac791f3d3bf969ab160bf80ff/tree/src/generator/jburg/burg/JBurgGenerator.java
> > >
> > > 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.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://apacheroyaleci.westus2.cloudapp.azure.com:8080/view/Royale%20Release/
> > > >
> > > > 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://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/wiki/Release-Manager-Notes
> > > >
> > > > 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://codingsans.com/blog/selenium-with-docker-testing
> > > > >> <
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://codingsans.com/blog/selenium-with-docker-testing
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.blazemeter.com/blog/how-to-run-selenium-tests-in-docker
> > > > >> <
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.blazemeter.com/blog/how-to-run-selenium-tests-in-docker
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/docker-selenium
> > > > >> <
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/SeleniumHQ/docker-selenium
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > 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://hub.docker.com/r/beli/firefox-flash/
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>
> ________________________________
> > > > >> >>> 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://www.channelfutures.com/open-source/when-not-to-use-docker-understanding-the-limitations-of-containers
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> 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://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html
> > > > >> >>> <
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/README.html
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> 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
> > > >
>
