Hi Alex, Instruction here [1] contains everything what I need to know in order to make RC1 ? I'm going to start trying tomorrow my time.
[1] https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/wiki/Release-Manager-Notes Thanks, Piotr wt., 18 cze 2019 o 07:51 Piotr Zarzycki <[email protected]> napisał(a): > Hi Alex, > > Thank you! I will be working in release next week, so if anyone have > anything to add there is some time. > > Thanks, > Piotr > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019, 7:28 AM Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Mx tests are working locally for me with this last change to >> ListItemRenderer. >> >> So, the question for everyone is: is there anything else we want to put >> in before trying to cut a release? >> >> We might need to change the ASDoc app after Greg's last change. We might >> want to bang on ASDoc for a bit and see if anything major needs fixing >> before cutting a release. >> >> The only other thing I thought of was trying to upgrade Selenium so we >> can use a recent FireFox version. Right now we are stuck way back on FF47, >> but I've also heard that more recent FF versions are less friendly to >> Flash, so you have to use some other browser to test Flash. That's ok for >> building the Royale SDK since the Flash tests are run in >> FlashPlayerDebugger and the JS tests are run in a browser like FF. >> >> I'm tempted to say we should punt the inject_html in modules problem to >> the next release. >> >> I will be adding more details to >> https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/wiki/Release-Manager-Notes >> But there should be enough there to get an RC out for vote. >> >> Thanks, >> -Alex >> >> On 6/17/19, 11:06 AM, "Alex Harui" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I just saw ASDoc work well enough for me to start with >> mx.binding.BindabilityInfo and switch to mx.charts.AxisRenderer. >> >> There might be JSON parsing issues with other classes. Run the >> bin/js-debug version, check the console if things don't load and see what >> file failed to load and why. >> >> I will take a look at MXTests next. >> >> -Alex >> >> On 6/17/19, 8:08 AM, "Alex Harui" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> ASDoc is not fully working for me. I've been working on that the >> past several days. It took quite a while to fix the JSON output from new >> and interesting ASDoc patterns. I'm now looking into failures due to >> changes in coercion rules in the JS output. ASDoc was trying to save time >> by using plain objects that were isomorphic to a class instead of actual >> class instances. >> >> MXTests are failing on the CI server and probably locally but I >> haven't gotten that far. >> >> I would think we want these things to work, but you are the RM so >> it is up to you. Volunteers are welcome to help with these and other tasks. >> >> -Alex >> >> On 6/17/19, 12:44 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Alex, >> >> I don't see any answer here - can I start with trying your >> instruction and >> start release ? >> >> Thanks, >> Piotr >> >> śr., 12 cze 2019 o 10:12 Carlos Rovira < >> [email protected]> napisał(a): >> >> > Hi Alex, >> > just build from scratch right now and seems maven and ant >> was ok >> > >> > El mié., 12 jun. 2019 a las 10:02, Alex Harui >> (<[email protected]>) >> > escribió: >> > >> > > The merge is complete, and the main builds seem to be >> successful, except >> > > for Maven on royale-asjs which was failing before the >> merge. >> > > >> > > I'm still catching up on other things, but I think there >> are some bugs we >> > > need to fix before cutting the release? I think ASDoc >> may not be fully >> > > working? What else? >> > > >> > > -Alex >> > > >> > > On 6/10/19, 11:05 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" < >> [email protected]> >> > 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 >> <[email protected]> >> > > 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" >> <[email protected]> >> > 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" < >> > [email protected] >> > > > >> > > > 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 >> > <[email protected] >> > > > >> > > > 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%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959643335&sdata=ZYf5QUAPr%2BNKndH9vr8pI7TeTAWX1hxLMV%2FyKb1U0g4%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" < >> [email protected]> >> > 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" < >> > > [email protected]> >> > > > 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 >> > > > > (<[email protected]>) >> > > > > 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%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959643335&sdata=tCcelcUXdJFddO5EtAM3or35OvY1W55uN0axY%2FJRIcI%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" >> > > > <[email protected]> >> > > > > 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" >> > > > <[email protected]> >> > > > > 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" < >> > > > > [email protected]> >> > > > > > 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%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959648328&sdata=W9%2B3T2XDDiDXUDWXYBWV4DYLYZlsJGcfhnhD2hXzTh0%3D&reserved=0 >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Is this doc up to >> date? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > Om >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019 >> at 12:02 PM >> > > OmPrakash >> > > > Muppirala < >> > > > > > [email protected]> >> > > > > > 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 >> > > > > > <[email protected]> >> > > > > > > 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" < >> > > > > [email protected]> 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%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959648328&sdata=cg4RjT3Tb9nBspx0dWR1ENPGiSrOk4ooKpQK8vmatLs%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%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959648328&sdata=cg4RjT3Tb9nBspx0dWR1ENPGiSrOk4ooKpQK8vmatLs%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%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959648328&sdata=9UnncgpaERA7ATYkT8zcyEzqgmV4%2FqxzpFXcXZVY%2BhE%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%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959653317&sdata=Ta36Y8PPxHJauVKuQui74a0Mm5WyfGSTKZeK2g09gHI%3D&reserved=0 >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-selenium&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959653317&sdata=4bvIekmv9Gv%2Fim0qWdiPNJpSm5r3Tb3H6dlX%2Buassuc%3D&reserved=0 >> > > > > > >> < >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FSeleniumHQ%2Fdocker-selenium&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C2e85c48a75964c54aadd08d6f34e8829%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636963915959653317&sdata=4bvIekmv9Gv%2Fim0qWdiPNJpSm5r3Tb3H6dlX%2Buassuc%3D&reserved=0 >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > On Feb 6, >> 2019, at 8:59 >> > PM, >> > > Alex >> > > > Harui >> > > > > > <[email protected]> >> > > > > > >> 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, >> > > -- Piotr Zarzycki Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
