I am not entirely sure why these files get bumped post release. We could try to run that step before the release next time, unless someone can thing of a reason why not...
On a different topic, I don't see the 'draft new release' button mentioned in step (3) of the GitHub docs [1]. Does anyone have a clue? [1] Managing releases in a repository - GitHub Docs<https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/releasing-projects-on-github/managing-releases-in-a-repository#creating-a-release> [https://github.githubassets.com/images/modules/open_graph/github-logo.png]<https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/releasing-projects-on-github/managing-releases-in-a-repository#creating-a-release> Managing releases in a repository - GitHub Docs<https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/releasing-projects-on-github/managing-releases-in-a-repository#creating-a-release> In the "Release title" field, type a title for your release. In the "Describe this release" field, type a description for your release. If you @mention anyone in the description, the published release will include a Contributors section with an avatar list of all the mentioned users. Alternatively, you can automatically generate your release notes by clicking Generate release notes. docs.github.com ________________________________ From: Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@bowlerhat.dev> Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2024 6:25 PM To: dev@royale.apache.org <dev@royale.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS} Release Apache Royale 0.9.12 RC2 We've been having daily CI build failures. I made that commit to get the CI passing again. We should probably run that script sooner rather than waiting for after release. -- Josh Tynjala Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev> On Wed, Dec 4, 2024 at 1:46 AM Yishay Weiss <yishayj...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Josh, I noticed you manually bumped some config files to version 0.9.13. > There is a script we run after release which is supposed to take care of > that, so I think it's unnecessary. > > Is anybody else planning to review the release candidate? > > > > ________________________________ > From: Greg Dove <greg.d...@gmail.com> > Sent: Monday, November 25, 2024 3:47 AM > To: dev@royale.apache.org <dev@royale.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS} Release Apache Royale 0.9.12 RC2 > > Just two things I'd like to note (neither affected my vote): > > 1. (Apologies if this may have been already discussed somewhere and I > missed it). For the release notes, maybe it would be good to have a "0.9.11 > Omitted" (or skipped or something else) to signify that this version was > explicitly skipped. I am not sure if it is necessary or not, and I expect > it can simply be done in the future. It just seems odd (to me) to have a > version sequence with no mention of that. > > 2. The ApproveRoyale.xml script reported version 1.9 for my Java version, > which is java 9. But my actual java executable in the path and JAVA_HOME is > java 17, and i don't believe I have java 9 anywhere anymore. > So maybe the ApproveRoyale script should have this: > Java ${java.version} > instead of: > Java ${ant.java.version} > but I don't know.... if anyone has suggestions, please share :) > > > > On Sat, Nov 23, 2024 at 9:28 AM Josh Tynjala <joshtynj...@bowlerhat.dev> > wrote: > > > It is also worth mentioning that when the approval script finishes > > successfully, the apache-royale-x.y.z-src directory will actually > contain a > > binary distribution that the approval script built from source. This may > be > > JS-only or JS-SWF depending on which environment variables that you have > > set. > > > > Certain environment variables being non-empty trigger the build of a > JS-SWF > > SDK. So, to build a JS-only SDK, you should make sure that those > > environment variables are NOT set. > > > > If I remember correctly, the main one that should not be set when you > want > > to build a JS-only SDK is AIR_HOME. > > > > However, here are several SWF environment variables that are not needed > > when building the JS-only SDK with the approval script, and it's probably > > safest to clear them all before running the approval script if you want a > > JS-only SDK: > > > > AIR_HOME > > PLAYERGLOBAL_HOME > > PLAYERGLOBAL_VERSION > > FLASHPLAYER_DEBUGGER > > > > I cleared all of these environment variables on my machine, and I got a > > JS-only SDK in the apache-royale-0.9.12-src directory that worked in > > vscode-as3mxml. > > > > One final note, after a JS-SWF SDK is built, it will not include Adobe's > > playerglobal.swc or the AIR SDK. The JS-SWF SDK won't work in IDEs like > > Moonshine or VSCode until these are added manually. > > > > Hopefully, this helps folks with testing! > > > > -- > > Josh Tynjala > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev> > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 21, 2024 at 3:27 AM Piotr Zarzycki < > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi Yishay, > > > > > > I have gone through tests using ApprovalScript.xml while - building > from > > > source and everything else went fine, produced binaries doesn't work in > > > Moonshine. Build trough approval produced folder > > > "apache-royale-0.9.12-bin-js-swf" - Inside there are three folders as > > usual > > > - I tried "royale-asjs" - Moonshine recognize this correctly, language > > > server is working fine, but when I tried build my project using it - > > > Console was basically empty - no sign of building. - Is this the right > > > folder which can be used in IDE ? > > > > > > With my projects I'm usually using binaries JS-only, not js-swf. > > > > > > Using Maven artifacts my projects are building correctly. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Piotr > > > > > > > > > > > > śr., 20 lis 2024 o 09:30 Maria Jose Esteve <mjest...@iest.com> > > napisał(a): > > > > > > > Thanks Yishay, I've never checked this before but I will over the > > > weekend. > > > > Thx > > > > > > > > -----Mensaje original----- > > > > De: Greg Dove <greg.d...@gmail.com> > > > > Enviado el: miércoles, 20 de noviembre de 2024 7:29 > > > > Para: dev@royale.apache.org > > > > Asunto: Re: [DISCUSS} Release Apache Royale 0.9.12 RC2 > > > > > > > > Yes, thanks for making this happen, Yishay :) I will try to find time > > in > > > > the next two days, otherwise it will be Saturday at the latest. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 6:38 PM Piotr Zarzycki < > > > piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Thanks Yishay! Good work! I will try to look into that tomorrow. > > > > > > > > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 19 Nov 2024 at 18:15, Harbs <harbs.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Great work! Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > FYI, I’m traveling for a few days. I’m not sure when I’ll have > time > > > > > > to test. It might not be until next week. > > > > > > > > > > > > Harbs > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 18, 2024, at 11:04 PM, Yishay Weiss > > > > > > > <yishayj...@hotmail.com> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is the discussion thread. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Yishay Weiss > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Piotr Zarzycki > > > > > >
