Re: [FLEXJS] Object.defineProperty
I’m starting in on this. I’m unclear how you access the superclass’s
getter or setter. Anybody know?
ActionScript:
function set foo(value:int):void
{
if (value != super.foo)
super.foo = value;
}
Thanks,
-Alex
On 1/19/15, 12:49 PM, "Erik de Bruin" wrote:
>Actually, JSGoogEmitter.java still has code to emit that method, so,
>"simply" removing the override in FlexJS should get you started ;-)
>
>EdB
>
>
>
>On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 8:52 PM, Erik de Bruin wrote:
>> Definitely!
>>
>> Edb
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday, January 19, 2015, Alex Harui wrote:
>>>
>>> I think we’ve agreed that IE9 is now the oldest browser that FlexJS
>>>will
>>> support in terms of JS output. The original motivation was to get
>>>enough
>>> SVG support to do the graphics/skinning. Folks needing to run
>>>something
>>> on older browsers can deploy the SWF version since those old browsers
>>> probably have Flash.
>>>
>>> If we’re going to make IE9 the baseline, should we start using
>>> Object.defineProperty instead of set_ and get_ functions?
>>>
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ix Multimedia Software
>>
>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>>
>> T. 06-51952295
>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>
>
>
>--
>Ix Multimedia Software
>
>Jan Luykenstraat 27
>3521 VB Utrecht
>
>T. 06-51952295
>I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [FlexJS] FlatSpark and skins
The CSS skin Alex cited is called Flat UI [1]. FlatSpark is basically a port from that skin, our main goal was to be as close to that as possible. That's why FlatSpark has some limitations regarding customization, we just tried to port the skin, maintaining its colors and pre-defined sizes. Creating the skin for FlexJS based on the CSS version, in this case, would be definitely easier. [1] http://designmodo.github.io/Flat-UI/
Re: JAR in TLF svn/git mirror
On 1/29/15, 3:27 PM, "Harbs" wrote: >I think it’s likely that we’re going to break some of the tests if we >swap out the texts for something else. > >If someone wants to try, feel free, but it seems like a lot of work. I thought we’d found that the provenance of some of the other texts were in question and were going to swap out some text anyway. I don’t know what kinds of things the tests were looking for, but if we swap in text could we just assume that whatever result we get is right given that they all pass now? > >I really don’t understand why this is so complicated. Do we really need >explicit attribution for some text that’s only being used in test suites? >No one will even ever see the text except for some very small portions >that might flash across a screen. It seems to me that some text like: >"Potions of the texts used in the test suites are from public domain >texts” is all that we’d need in a NOTICE. That really seems to me like >it’s enough attribution. IMO, this stuff is always complicated because the instructions are not clear and it takes several emails to agree and each email eats up 2 hours of community time. That’s why if we can find an easy way to swap in different text, one person can do that without bothering everyone else. -Alex
Re: JAR in TLF svn/git mirror
I think it’s likely that we’re going to break some of the tests if we swap out the texts for something else. If someone wants to try, feel free, but it seems like a lot of work. I really don’t understand why this is so complicated. Do we really need explicit attribution for some text that’s only being used in test suites? No one will even ever see the text except for some very small portions that might flash across a screen. It seems to me that some text like: "Potions of the texts used in the test suites are from public domain texts” is all that we’d need in a NOTICE. That really seems to me like it’s enough attribution. On Jan 30, 2015, at 12:46 AM, Alex Harui wrote: > All this is more reason for us to simply remove the public domain text and > replace it with text from our README or something like that. Can we agree > to do that?
Re: JAR in TLF svn/git mirror
Hi, > If we put the attribution in the main NOTICE, then if we don’t package the > tests in the release artifact we have to remember to change NOTICE or use > a different NOTICE. I would imagine other projects who composite NOTICE > files are exposed in the same way. The NOTICE/LICENSE that's used in the SDK is in another repo so I don't see that issue here we just have to correct the top level TLF one. There's no need for multiple NOTICE/LICENSE in TLF just one for the whole repo. > All this is more reason for us to simply remove the public domain text and > replace it with text from our README or something like that. Can we agree > to do that? That's also an valid option but may be more work than changing a few headers and possibly adding few lines to NOTICE/LICENSE. Thanks, Justin
Re: JAR in TLF svn/git mirror
On 1/29/15, 2:33 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote: >Hi, > >> You can just add a comment before that public domain text, that it's >>public >> domain. >> >> That doesn't put any more constraints on users than the Apache License >>so >> you're fine. > >I's prefer to see in the actual files (so you know what is the public >domain content) as above but I also think it's needed somewhere top >level. If not the NOTICE file or perhaps then the LICENSE file as >suggested by "Attribution is required (in a similar fashion to permissive >licenses)". [1] Think what you do when adding MIT/BSD licenses (ie add >them to LICENSE). > >Take this scenario. Someone downloads the TLF repo because they want to >use it in their project, they take a look at the top level LICENSE/NOTICE >and currently would have no idea that there was content from the public >domain in our repo, so they just bundle it up and distribute it with no >changes to their LICENSE or NOTICE. If we put the attribution in the main NOTICE, then if we don’t package the tests in the release artifact we have to remember to change NOTICE or use a different NOTICE. I would imagine other projects who composite NOTICE files are exposed in the same way. All this is more reason for us to simply remove the public domain text and replace it with text from our README or something like that. Can we agree to do that? -Alex
Re: JAR in TLF svn/git mirror
Hi, > You can just add a comment before that public domain text, that it's public > domain. > > That doesn't put any more constraints on users than the Apache License so > you're fine. I's prefer to see in the actual files (so you know what is the public domain content) as above but I also think it's needed somewhere top level. If not the NOTICE file or perhaps then the LICENSE file as suggested by "Attribution is required (in a similar fashion to permissive licenses)". [1] Think what you do when adding MIT/BSD licenses (ie add them to LICENSE). Take this scenario. Someone downloads the TLF repo because they want to use it in their project, they take a look at the top level LICENSE/NOTICE and currently would have no idea that there was content from the public domain in our repo, so they just bundle it up and distribute it with no changes to their LICENSE or NOTICE. Thanks, Justin 1. http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#can-works-placed-in-the-public-domain-be-included-in-apache-products
Re: JAR in TLF svn/git mirror
On Thursday, January 29, 2015, Alex Harui wrote: > ... There is a code file with a portion of the public domain text in it that > would probably force a mention of this content in NOTICE You can just add a comment before that public domain text, that it's public domain. That doesn't put any more constraints on users than the Apache License so you're fine. -Bertrand
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
I just committed a couple of fixes for typos in the urls for asdocs. Thanks, Om On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > I think I’m done fiddling. I’m ok with Tom pushing this to production. > We can always fix up other stuff later. > > -Alex > > On 1/29/15, 1:22 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: > > >Hmm, that turned out to be more interesting than I expected. We actually > >don’t talk about the SWFObject download anywhere. Something to think > >about for the next release. > > > >-Alex > > > >On 1/29/15, 12:36 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: > > > >> > >> > >>On 1/29/15, 12:32 PM, "Tom Chiverton" wrote: > >> > >>>On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 19:11:55 Alex Harui wrote: > there is the words “current 4.13”. The binary page says “current 4.13 > and > later” which might just be changed to “4.13 and later” and maybe the > source page should say "4.13 and later" as well. > >>> > >>>Staging updated. > >> > >>Thanks. Reading it again, I realize that the dependency list needs > >>updating since BlazeDS is no longer an optional dependency. I’ll fix it > >>shortly. > >> > >>-Alex > >> > > > >
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
I think I’m done fiddling. I’m ok with Tom pushing this to production. We can always fix up other stuff later. -Alex On 1/29/15, 1:22 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: >Hmm, that turned out to be more interesting than I expected. We actually >don’t talk about the SWFObject download anywhere. Something to think >about for the next release. > >-Alex > >On 1/29/15, 12:36 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: > >> >> >>On 1/29/15, 12:32 PM, "Tom Chiverton" wrote: >> >>>On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 19:11:55 Alex Harui wrote: there is the words “current 4.13”. The binary page says “current 4.13 and later” which might just be changed to “4.13 and later” and maybe the source page should say "4.13 and later" as well. >>> >>>Staging updated. >> >>Thanks. Reading it again, I realize that the dependency list needs >>updating since BlazeDS is no longer an optional dependency. I’ll fix it >>shortly. >> >>-Alex >> >
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
Hmm, that turned out to be more interesting than I expected. We actually don’t talk about the SWFObject download anywhere. Something to think about for the next release. -Alex On 1/29/15, 12:36 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: > > >On 1/29/15, 12:32 PM, "Tom Chiverton" wrote: > >>On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 19:11:55 Alex Harui wrote: >>> there is the words “current 4.13”. The binary page says “current 4.13 >>>and >>> later” which might just be changed to “4.13 and later” and maybe the >>> source page should say "4.13 and later" as well. >> >>Staging updated. > >Thanks. Reading it again, I realize that the dependency list needs >updating since BlazeDS is no longer an optional dependency. I’ll fix it >shortly. > >-Alex >
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
On 1/29/15, 12:32 PM, "Tom Chiverton" wrote: >On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 19:11:55 Alex Harui wrote: >> there is the words “current 4.13”. The binary page says “current 4.13 >>and >> later” which might just be changed to “4.13 and later” and maybe the >> source page should say "4.13 and later" as well. > >Staging updated. Thanks. Reading it again, I realize that the dependency list needs updating since BlazeDS is no longer an optional dependency. I’ll fix it shortly. -Alex
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 19:11:55 Alex Harui wrote: > there is the words “current 4.13”. The binary page says “current 4.13 and > later” which might just be changed to “4.13 and later” and maybe the > source page should say "4.13 and later" as well. Staging updated. -- Tom
RE: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
I updated the image to have 4.14 Is it alright to commit? Neil -Original Message- From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Sent: January-29-15 12:17 PM To: dev@flex.apache.org; Neil Madsen Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2 On 1/29/15, 11:08 AM, "Neil Madsen" wrote: >Tom, >Do you know where the photoshop files are for the main page slideshow? I think trunk/content/images/comps folder in the SVN for the site. -Alex
RE: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
Updated image and adjusted the CSS for the slideshow. It was being pushed to the right which created that weird flicker when transitioning between images. Alignment should be good now. You should be able to see the updates on staging [ http://flex.staging.apache.org/index.html ]. Neil -Original Message- From: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Sent: January-29-15 12:17 PM To: dev@flex.apache.org; Neil Madsen Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2 On 1/29/15, 11:08 AM, "Neil Madsen" wrote: >Tom, >Do you know where the photoshop files are for the main page slideshow? I think trunk/content/images/comps folder in the SVN for the site. -Alex
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
On 1/29/15, 11:08 AM, "Neil Madsen" wrote: >Tom, >Do you know where the photoshop files are for the main page slideshow? I think trunk/content/images/comps folder in the SVN for the site. -Alex
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
OK, I took care of the JIRA version. I’ll go edit sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml shortly. On both http://flex.staging.apache.org/download-binaries.html and http://flex.staging.apache.org/download-source.html there is the words “current 4.13”. The binary page says “current 4.13 and later” which might just be changed to “4.13 and later” and maybe the source page should say "4.13 and later" as well. I happened to notice on the binary page that the Java version list seems out of date. -Alex On 1/29/15, 10:55 AM, "Tom Chiverton" wrote: >On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 16:25:19 Chiverton wrote: >> I may be able to do this tonight (~ +3 hours from now). I'll post here >> if I start. > >From >https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Where+to+publish+updated+ >SDK+version+numbers >I have *not* done > >Add an entry to the Apache Blog announcing the new version >- don't know how to access this). > >Update index.cmsPage and add the new news item (blog post) to the >page >-no blog post yet > >Update the /asdocs/, if needed. The SVN only allows ~500 pages per >commit or it starts to give weird errors. Keep this in mind and commit >thoughtfully >- I think this is done, right ? > > Slideshow on the front page. >-I have no idea how to work Photoshop. > >JIRA (set to 'released' and create next version number as >'unreleased') >-I don't have the access to do this, or the option is buried in Jira >beyond my ability to find it > >I've only edited install/sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml on the web site, is >that right ? > >When I edited ../templates/flex-v2-footer.html it says "updated revision >-1" but it's looking OK on the staging site. > >The changes are staged on >http://flex.staging.apache.org/download-binaries.html (etc). > >Could someone double check the paths and see if I missed anything on the >web side of things ? >-- >Tom
RE: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
Tom, Do you know where the photoshop files are for the main page slideshow? Neil -Original Message- From: Tom Chiverton [mailto:t...@apache.org] Slideshow on the front page. -I have no idea how to work Photoshop.
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 18:52:59 Alex Harui wrote: > Thanks for working on it. I saw one commit email for the change to > sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml. I think you also need to add an entry for > 4.13 that matches the pattern for 4.12 so that all legacy versions are > still offered by the Installer. All I did was copy the existing 4.13 and update it to 4.14. It's true that 4.13 is different from 4.12 though I don't know the significance. The staging site currently has: http://archive.apache.org/dist/flex/4.12.1/binaries/"; file="apache-flex-sdk-4.12.1-bin" legacy="true"/> which seems sensible to me. Maybe someone who knows the installer can chip in ? -- Tom
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 16:25:19 Chiverton wrote: > I may be able to do this tonight (~ +3 hours from now). I'll post here > if I start. >From https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Where+to+publish+updated+SDK+version+numbers I have *not* done Add an entry to the Apache Blog announcing the new version - don't know how to access this). Update index.cmsPage and add the new news item (blog post) to the page -no blog post yet Update the /asdocs/, if needed. The SVN only allows ~500 pages per commit or it starts to give weird errors. Keep this in mind and commit thoughtfully - I think this is done, right ? Slideshow on the front page. -I have no idea how to work Photoshop. JIRA (set to 'released' and create next version number as 'unreleased') -I don't have the access to do this, or the option is buried in Jira beyond my ability to find it I've only edited install/sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml on the web site, is that right ? When I edited ../templates/flex-v2-footer.html it says "updated revision -1" but it's looking OK on the staging site. The changes are staged on http://flex.staging.apache.org/download-binaries.html (etc). Could someone double check the paths and see if I missed anything on the web side of things ? -- Tom
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
Thanks for working on it. I saw one commit email for the change to sdk-installer-config-4.0.xml. I think you also need to add an entry for 4.13 that matches the pattern for 4.12 so that all legacy versions are still offered by the Installer. -Alex On 1/29/15, 10:28 AM, "Tom Chiverton" wrote: >On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 16:25:19 Chiverton wrote: >> I may be able to do this tonight (~ +3 hours from now). I'll post here >> if I start. > >I have begun updating the web site. I will post a list here later. > >-- >Tom
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
On Thursday 29 Jan 2015 16:25:19 Chiverton wrote: > I may be able to do this tonight (~ +3 hours from now). I'll post here > if I start. I have begun updating the web site. I will post a list here later. -- Tom
Re: JAR in TLF svn/git mirror
On 1/29/15, 1:02 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" wrote: >On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Alex Harui wrote: >> ...It just seems that once you start mixing content >> that isn’t public domain (in this case the TLF markup) if you have to >> determine the % of IP in order to determine which header to use it adds >> extra overhead. > >Yeah, that can complicate things, but maybe that TLF markup isnt' >really creative, in which case you don't really care. My new recommendation is to follow your recommendation from several weeks ago and simplify. We should just remove this public domain content and replace it with content that is under AL. This has been suggested by others in the JIRA thread so hopefully everyone will agree and someone will just do it. The bigger picture is even more complicated. There is a code file with a portion of the public domain text in it that would probably force a mention of this content in NOTICE. Thanks, -Alex
Re: Failing TLF Builds
On 1/29/15, 12:38 AM, "Harbs" wrote: >The last build has just those two tests failing: >http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/flex-tlf/321/ > >There were others as well. OK, well, at least we know it isn’t a side-effect. I poked around the code a bit. Have you tried adding more asserts to the test to verify, for example, that the SelManager.activePosition is what you think it should be? You might also test a few other things like the EditingMode. EditManager looks like it uses ENTER_FRAME events to do background processing, and I thought other parts of TLF may react to whether the player switches in and out of being the active window. -Alex
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
I may be able to do this tonight (~ +3 hours from now). I'll post here if I start. Tom On 29/01/15 16:04, Erik de Bruin wrote: The mirrors should have caught up by now, so if someone not on hotel WiFi would mind changing the installer-config, the new bits would be "in the wild." As to the website, I really do need help with that, that is outside my "comfort zone". The announcement will be done as soon as the website is updated and no earlier than the beginning of next week (when I get home). EdB On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Tom Chiverton wrote: Don't be afraid to ask :-) We have to wait for the Apache file mirror network to spread the new files around, then we make the announcement and update the site. Tom On 29/01/15 14:11, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: Sorry asking such questions ... Are there any plans to update installer and site according to the release? On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 2:52 AM, Chris Martin wrote: Chris, can I take that to mena that you are raising your hand to be the RM on the next release? hehe, I think i'll need to participate in a few more releases before jumping in as an RM. Wanna get my head around the legal stuffs a bit more. Chris From: aha...@adobe.com To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:36:52 + On 1/27/15, 8:40 AM, "Chris Martin" wrote: Sweet! Thanks Erik for your hard work as the RM, and thanks to everyone for their work on this release. Looking forward to another go at the RC-less process :) Chris Chris, can I take that to mena that you are raising your hand to be the RM on the next release? -Alex
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
The mirrors should have caught up by now, so if someone not on hotel WiFi would mind changing the installer-config, the new bits would be "in the wild." As to the website, I really do need help with that, that is outside my "comfort zone". The announcement will be done as soon as the website is updated and no earlier than the beginning of next week (when I get home). EdB On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Tom Chiverton wrote: > Don't be afraid to ask :-) > > We have to wait for the Apache file mirror network to spread the new files > around, then we make the announcement and update the site. > > Tom > > > On 29/01/15 14:11, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: >> >> Sorry asking such questions ... >> Are there any plans to update installer and site according to the release? >> >> On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 2:52 AM, Chris Martin >> wrote: >> Chris, can I take that to mena that you are raising your hand to be the >>> >>> RM on the next release? >>> >>> hehe, I think i'll need to participate in a few more releases before >>> jumping in as an RM. Wanna get my head around the legal stuffs a bit >>> more. >>> >>> Chris >>> From: aha...@adobe.com To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:36:52 + On 1/27/15, 8:40 AM, "Chris Martin" wrote: > Sweet! Thanks Erik for your hard work as the RM, and thanks to everyone > for their work on this release. Looking forward to another go at the > RC-less process :) > > Chris Chris, can I take that to mena that you are raising your hand to be the >>> >>> RM on the next release? -Alex >>> >> >> > -- Ix Multimedia Software Jan Luykenstraat 27 3521 VB Utrecht T. 06-51952295 I. www.ixsoftware.nl
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
Don't be afraid to ask :-) We have to wait for the Apache file mirror network to spread the new files around, then we make the announcement and update the site. Tom On 29/01/15 14:11, Maxim Solodovnik wrote: Sorry asking such questions ... Are there any plans to update installer and site according to the release? On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 2:52 AM, Chris Martin wrote: Chris, can I take that to mena that you are raising your hand to be the RM on the next release? hehe, I think i'll need to participate in a few more releases before jumping in as an RM. Wanna get my head around the legal stuffs a bit more. Chris From: aha...@adobe.com To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:36:52 + On 1/27/15, 8:40 AM, "Chris Martin" wrote: Sweet! Thanks Erik for your hard work as the RM, and thanks to everyone for their work on this release. Looking forward to another go at the RC-less process :) Chris Chris, can I take that to mena that you are raising your hand to be the RM on the next release? -Alex
Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2
Sorry asking such questions ... Are there any plans to update installer and site according to the release? On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 2:52 AM, Chris Martin wrote: > > Chris, can I take that to mena that you are raising your hand to be the > RM > > on the next release? > > hehe, I think i'll need to participate in a few more releases before > jumping in as an RM. Wanna get my head around the legal stuffs a bit more. > > Chris > > > From: aha...@adobe.com > > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [RESULT][VOTE] for Apache Flex SDK 4.14.0 RC2 > > Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 17:36:52 + > > > > > > > > On 1/27/15, 8:40 AM, "Chris Martin" wrote: > > > > >Sweet! Thanks Erik for your hard work as the RM, and thanks to everyone > > >for their work on this release. Looking forward to another go at the > > >RC-less process :) > > > > > >Chris > > > > Chris, can I take that to mena that you are raising your hand to be the > RM > > on the next release? > > > > -Alex > > > > -- WBR Maxim aka solomax
Re: JAR in TLF svn/git mirror
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > ...It just seems that once you start mixing content > that isn’t public domain (in this case the TLF markup) if you have to > determine the % of IP in order to determine which header to use it adds > extra overhead. Yeah, that can complicate things, but maybe that TLF markup isnt' really creative, in which case you don't really care. -Bertrand
Re: Tracking discussions in JIRA (was Re: [DISCUSS] Release Apache Flex 4.14.0)
On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Erik de Bruin wrote: > I'm pretty sure that if it didn't happen on dev@, it didn't happen... Yes ;-) Balancing jira and the dev list is...a balancing act indeed. I tend to avoid discussions in jira unless they are directly related to the specific issue at hand. As soon as a discussion can be interesting or relevant I think it should move to the dev list and if it's a decision that affects more than the tiny bit that's relevant to the jira issue it must happen on the dev list. It's easy to create links between the two, although it's not an official ASF archive I often use markmail.org for that. If you really want an ASF link, committers can use s.apache.org to shorten ASF archive links. My comment in a release thread was based on seeing people mention things like "the licensing issue" or "the header problem" instead of precise IDs like FLEX-34729 which leaves no space for interpretation about what you are currently discussing. And also makes the archives much more valuable if you need to go back to see how things happened. -Bertrand
Re: Failing TLF Builds
The last build has just those two tests failing: http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/flex-tlf/321/ There were others as well. On Jan 29, 2015, at 12:20 AM, Alex Harui wrote: > I confirmed that the CI server also timed out. IMO, I wouldn’t worry > about the arrow tests until you see them fail in a run where nothing > failed before it. > > I ran the tests in the debugger and tons of trace statements were dumped > to the console. They look like: > > [trace] 340 71.95 STR2ColBB autoColBA autoConBB alwaysConBA auto > > It isn’t clear to me whether that is indicative of some bad code or config > that is rendering and re-rendering the content or whether it really needs > to run that code path that many times, but the trace statement is probably > contributing to the likelihood that the test will time out. > > > Anyway, hope that helps. I’m going back to my FlexJS code. > > -Alex > > On 1/28/15, 1:09 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: > >> I think I have a clue. I am getting an error due to a script timeout. >> Have you examined the test output on the build server to see if had >> something like this? >> >> I think the results are in >> bin/apps/automation_apps/TEST-UnitTest.Tests.ContainerAttributeTest.xml >> >> -Alex >> >> On 1/28/15, 1:02 PM, "Harbs" wrote: >> >>> run “ant all” on TLF. >>> >>> On Jan 28, 2015, at 11:00 PM, Chris Martin wrote: >>> How can I run these tests locally on my machine? :) Chris > From: harbs.li...@gmail.com > Subject: Re: Failing TLF Builds > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 22:31:30 +0200 > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > So maybe this is something that needs to be fixed to make the tests > more stable. > > On Jan 28, 2015, at 10:02 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > >> Actually, in the little I’ve looked at the test so far, I >> have concerns that a failing test could leave the suite in a bad >> state so >> the only important thing is the first test to fail. > >>> >> >
