AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

[Christofer Dutz]

HI,

well I'm not talking about taking EXTERNC out of compiler.jx into a dedicated, 
package. I'm talking about taking the Integration-Tests that rely on parts of 
compiler.jx being built into a dedicated testsuite artifact. I think EXTERNC is 
ok to be kept where it is.

I am worried about yet another tool that has to be installed, yet another 
packaging system and all the integration problems that come with it. I would 
probably be able to integrate things into the Maven build, but we are not 
making things simpler but adding another technology stack for creating simple 
AS code. I think it should be easier to crate such a generator using a 
JavaScript grammar and Antlr4. But I would really like to start working on 
something like this AFTER finishing the migration to Maven. Otherwise it's 
shooting on moving targets.

Chris


Von: Michael Schmalle 
Gesendet: Montag, 14. März 2016 18:02
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 
0.6.0

Yeah lets not get started on the whole parsing js files. :)

What I liked about gcc is it abstracted the AST and took care of the
parsing irregularities of JS.

The problem is the AST walking like I did in ExternC, I had to template
that as though I knew I was parsing prototypes as the extern definition
says.

It also relies on jsdoc tags so add another layer. JS is just a pain in the
ass to deal with, plain and simple. Years ago I was able create a grammar,
parser and a read/write framework for ActionScript using ANTLR only because
it closely followed a spec, I hate JS for this reason. :)

I just hate duplicating work and that is why I asked Josh what I did, I
totally wasn't asking him to donate anything.

Mike


On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Alex Harui  wrote:

>
>
> On 3/14/16, 8:34 AM, "Michael Schmalle"  wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Alex Harui  wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 3/14/16, 8:19 AM, "Michael Schmalle" 
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> >That said, there is only "so much" that compiler can do because I
> >>hacked
> >> >it
> >> >together in about a month. Thinking about a way to create something
> >>that
> >> >can support a yriad amount of definitions that are supported by the
> >> >current
> >> >TS community is definitely something to think about.
> >>
> >> Yes, but when last discussed, Justin called the licensing integrity of
> >>the
> >> TS files into question, so it may be less work for us to have any code
> >> that generates extern SWCs from those files come from a non-Apache
> >>project
> >> unless someone wants to take the time to sort through it all.  Of course
> >> Apache is interested in all sorts of things like dts2as to be
> >>open-sourced
> >> at Apache, but the reality is that it won't always be the case.
> >>
> >>
> >Yeah, Yeah yeah :) I remember that conversation and that is why I made the
> >compiler. But, I forgot that it was never resolved.
>
> It is really up to Josh as to whether he wants to bring dts2as to Apache.
> He has every right to keep it outside of Apache and maybe even make some
> money off of it.
>
> >
> >Ok I ask this, is there anything it doesn't do right now for the core
> >stuff
> >you are working?
>
> Are you asking about ExternC?  It works well enough for good extern .js
> files.  The problem is that there are a few libraries (Google Closure
> Library and CreateJS and probably Cordova) were there is no externs files
> so we are asking ExternC to try to process the actual code, which it
> doesn't do so well, so we've fashioned other ways of skipping ExternC or
> batch modification of the .js files to get ExternC to work and that is
> making more work for Chris' Maven stuff since the 8 SWCs have at least 3
> or 4 different recipes.
>
> IMO, it would be awesome to see ExternC grow into a tool that could
> generate the SWCs from the actual library code so folks don't have to
> maintain d.ts files or extern .js files, but I think that's a ton of work
> especially given that some JS libraries are written with different JS
> patters like the IIFE pattern.
>
> Also, Chris and I are wondering if ExternC could be its own folder like
> compiler and compiler.jx.  It might simplify the Maven work.
>
> -Alex
>
>
>

Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

[Alex Harui]

On 3/14/16, 8:13 AM, "Christofer Dutz"  wrote:

>Hi Alex,
>
>I'm actually currently looking at the unmodified ANT build in develop.
>Here I can see that the extern JavaScript stuff in GCL is checked in. The
>build.xml in line contains this block:
>
>
>failonerror="false">
>
>
>value="-load-config=${basedir}/externs/GCL/GCL-compile-config.xml" />
>
>jar="${basedir}/compiler/generated/dist/sdk/lib/falcon-compc.jar"
>fork="true"
>failonerror="true">
>
>
>value="-load-config=${basedir}/externs/GCL/compile-config.xml" />
>
>
>
> 
>Which makes EXTERNC generate the code to out/as ... there the code simply
>hangs around doing nothing as it it not referenced in GCLs
>compile-config.xml ... so I guess the complete EXTERNC block should be
>removed as well as the extern directory containing the JacaScript should
>be deleted as it doesn't produce the code that is used and it's just
>confusing to have it there.

Ah, I didn't notice that.  Yes, I think you can remove the call to externC.

-Alex

AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi,

I would prefer to stay in the Java world for now ;-)

Chris


Von: Josh Tynjala 
Gesendet: Montag, 14. März 2016 16:09
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 
0.6.0

dts2as pretty much does the same job as externc, except it uses TypeScript
definitions instead of JS externs. So yes, it probably could replace
externc.

One thing to keep in mind is that dts2as requires Node.js. Everything in
the SDK currently uses Java, as far as I know. Requiring another runtime
will make it more challenging to build everything.

- Josh

On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Michael Schmalle  wrote:

> Curious Josh if your typescript definition compiler can replace externc?
> How much overlap is there?
>
> I wanted to do exactly what you did with typescipt and use it's compiler
> but I didn't have enough time so I went the gcc extern route, there was a
> couple massive discussions a year ago bout that and using typescript
> definition files.
>
> Mike
>
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 4:08 PM, Christofer Dutz <
> christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the explanation :-)
> >
> > And what's actually happening in GCL? Here I can see a whole bunch of
> > JavaScript files as well as matching ActionScript sources. Here the
> out/as
> > sort of contains the same classes as the src directory, but the ones in
> the
> > src contain Apache headers and some imports. Is this eventually a relic
> > because the generated code had problems, that the generated code was
> > checked in in order to manually fix stuff. The generated code isn't
> picked
> > up as it is not mentioned in the source-path of the compile-config.xml
> > file. So actually downloading the lib, processing it and generating the
> AS
> > is simply obsolete now?
> >
> > The "js" extern directory seems to be similar, but in this case it seems
> > that only a hand full of classes are manually added. Is this too just a
> > "monkey patch" of falsely generated code and the "src" directory has
> > precedence before the "out/as" one?
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > 
> > Von: Josh Tynjala 
> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 13. März 2016 19:09
> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release
> > FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0
> >
> > 1. Externs tell the Google Closure compiler which JS APIs it shouldn't
> > rename when optimizing/minifying because they come from external
> libraries.
> >
> > They're also a handy way to get all the interfaces for a JS library
> > because...
> >
> > 2. externc generates ActionScript stubs from the externs. When we
> compile a
> > SWC from them, we get something kind of like playerglobal.swc, but for a
> JS
> > library. Something the compiler can use the check types, and an IDE can
> use
> > to suggest APIs, but not actually included in the output.
> >
> > 3. The SWF would compile, but you'd get runtime errors in Flash Player or
> > AIR because the libraries don't exist there.
> >
> > - Josh
> > On Mar 13, 2016 9:46 AM, "Christofer Dutz" 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Alex,
> > >
> > > having a look at everything I think I am figuring out how to build the
> > > externs:
> > > 1. Get the JavaScript code:
> > > - google_maps, jasmine, jquery, js are downloaded in
> > > compiler.jx/downloads.xml
> > > - cordova, GCL and node is manually checked in (Guess the input
> > > didn't work well with EXTERNC, so it was manually
> > >   tweaked instead of writing the replacement rules for it.)
> > > - createjs is downloaded by externs/createjs/build.xml
> > > In the end each directory contains an "externs" directory
> containing
> > > JavaScript input
> > >
> > > 2. Do some post processing by replacing stuff, that was probably
> causing
> > > problems with EXTERNC
> > >
> > > 3. Run EXTERNC to generate ActionScript from the JavaScript input and
> > > output that code to "out/as"
> > >
> > > 4. Use falcon to compile the code in "src" and "out/as" into an swc.
> > >
> > > Am I correct with this? If yes, it would have been great, if at least
> two
> > > externs would actually do it the same way ;-)
> > >
> > > In any case, I do have a few big questions:
> > > - What are externs?
> > > - What does EXTERNC actually do? The Input JavaScript files don't seem
> to
> > > contain any form of logic and only seem to be some sort of interface,
> but
> > > interfaces to what?
> > > - If EXTERNC generates an ActionScript stub to connect to the real lib
> in
> > > a real JavaScript environment, what happens if I do a Flash compile
> with
> > > externs?
> > >
> > > I think the best solution would be to provide a maven-plugin with 2/3
> > > goals:
> > > - prepare: to download/unpack any javascript resources and do the
> > > replacing of strings (executed in Mavens generate-sources phase). The
> > stuff
> > > will be output to "target/generated-sources/externs-js"
> > > - externc: to generate th

AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

[Christofer Dutz]

Hi Alex,

I'm actually currently looking at the unmodified ANT build in develop. Here I 
can see that the extern JavaScript stuff in GCL is checked in. The build.xml in 
line contains this block:














 
Which makes EXTERNC generate the code to out/as ... there the code simply hangs 
around doing nothing as it it not referenced in GCLs compile-config.xml ... so 
I guess the complete EXTERNC block should be removed as well as the extern 
directory containing the JacaScript should be deleted as it doesn't produce the 
code that is used and it's just confusing to have it there.

Chris


Von: Alex Harui 
Gesendet: Montag, 14. März 2016 06:12
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 
0.6.0

On 3/13/16, 1:08 PM, "Christofer Dutz"  wrote:

>Thanks for the explanation :-)
>
>And what's actually happening in GCL? Here I can see a whole bunch of
>JavaScript files as well as matching ActionScript sources. Here the
>out/as sort of contains the same classes as the src directory, but the
>ones in the src contain Apache headers and some imports. Is this
>eventually a relic because the generated code had problems, that the
>generated code was checked in in order to manually fix stuff. The
>generated code isn't picked up as it is not mentioned in the source-path
>of the compile-config.xml file. So actually downloading the lib,
>processing it and generating the AS is simply obsolete now?

There shouldn't be stuff in GCL/out/as.  Could a Maven goal have tried to
generate it from the .js files you found?
It might be best to just eliminate the .js files in GCL.  More below...

>
>The "js" extern directory seems to be similar, but in this case it seems
>that only a hand full of classes are manually added. Is this too just a
>"monkey patch" of falsely generated code and the "src" directory has
>precedence before the "out/as" one?

The js/externs folder is legitimate.  It contains the .js files from
Google Closure Compiler.  The missing.js file is sort of like a patch to
those .js files.  The src folder contains a few things that are required
to get Vector to appear in js.swc.

As some have mentioned,  externs are sort of like header files.  They
specify the public API but not the implementation. ExternC processes the
extern .js files and generates .AS files.  The .js files you saw in GCL
was someone's attempt to see if ExternC could eat implementation files
(the Google Closure Library).  It couldn't and we decided not to spend any
more time trying to get it to work, so we punted and wrote .AS files.  For
createJS, I found I could get what I wanted for now by doing a bunch of
sed manipulations (via Ant Replace and ReplaceRegEx).

I have not looked to see if there is a subset of code that could create
ExternC without creating all of FalconJX.  So a refactor might be another
option.

I think you understand the pieces.  One way to think about it is to work
backwards:

-The final goal is a SWC.
-The SWC is created by CompC compiling a bunch of .AS files.
-Sometimes the AS files are generated by ExternC, sometimes they are
handwritten, sometimes both.
-If AS files are generated, it is generated by ExternC processing .JS
files.
-Most of the .JS files are downloaded, some are handwritten, some are
downloaded and then pre-processed with sed (or Ant Replace/ReplaceRegEx)

HTH,
-Alex

Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

[Alex Harui]

On 3/13/16, 1:08 PM, "Christofer Dutz"  wrote:

>Thanks for the explanation :-)
>
>And what's actually happening in GCL? Here I can see a whole bunch of
>JavaScript files as well as matching ActionScript sources. Here the
>out/as sort of contains the same classes as the src directory, but the
>ones in the src contain Apache headers and some imports. Is this
>eventually a relic because the generated code had problems, that the
>generated code was checked in in order to manually fix stuff. The
>generated code isn't picked up as it is not mentioned in the source-path
>of the compile-config.xml file. So actually downloading the lib,
>processing it and generating the AS is simply obsolete now?

There shouldn't be stuff in GCL/out/as.  Could a Maven goal have tried to
generate it from the .js files you found?
It might be best to just eliminate the .js files in GCL.  More below...

>
>The "js" extern directory seems to be similar, but in this case it seems
>that only a hand full of classes are manually added. Is this too just a
>"monkey patch" of falsely generated code and the "src" directory has
>precedence before the "out/as" one?

The js/externs folder is legitimate.  It contains the .js files from
Google Closure Compiler.  The missing.js file is sort of like a patch to
those .js files.  The src folder contains a few things that are required
to get Vector to appear in js.swc.

As some have mentioned,  externs are sort of like header files.  They
specify the public API but not the implementation. ExternC processes the
extern .js files and generates .AS files.  The .js files you saw in GCL
was someone's attempt to see if ExternC could eat implementation files
(the Google Closure Library).  It couldn't and we decided not to spend any
more time trying to get it to work, so we punted and wrote .AS files.  For
createJS, I found I could get what I wanted for now by doing a bunch of
sed manipulations (via Ant Replace and ReplaceRegEx).

I have not looked to see if there is a subset of code that could create
ExternC without creating all of FalconJX.  So a refactor might be another
option.

I think you understand the pieces.  One way to think about it is to work
backwards:  

-The final goal is a SWC.
-The SWC is created by CompC compiling a bunch of .AS files.
-Sometimes the AS files are generated by ExternC, sometimes they are
handwritten, sometimes both.
-If AS files are generated, it is generated by ExternC processing .JS
files.
-Most of the .JS files are downloaded, some are handwritten, some are
downloaded and then pre-processed with sed (or Ant Replace/ReplaceRegEx)

HTH,
-Alex

AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

[Christofer Dutz]

Thanks for the explanation :-)

And what's actually happening in GCL? Here I can see a whole bunch of 
JavaScript files as well as matching ActionScript sources. Here the out/as sort 
of contains the same classes as the src directory, but the ones in the src 
contain Apache headers and some imports. Is this eventually a relic because the 
generated code had problems, that the generated code was checked in in order to 
manually fix stuff. The generated code isn't picked up as it is not mentioned 
in the source-path of the compile-config.xml file. So actually downloading the 
lib, processing it and generating the AS is simply obsolete now?

The "js" extern directory seems to be similar, but in this case it seems that 
only a hand full of classes are manually added. Is this too just a "monkey 
patch" of falsely generated code and the "src" directory has precedence before 
the "out/as" one?

Chris


Von: Josh Tynjala 
Gesendet: Sonntag, 13. März 2016 19:09
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 
0.6.0

1. Externs tell the Google Closure compiler which JS APIs it shouldn't
rename when optimizing/minifying because they come from external libraries.

They're also a handy way to get all the interfaces for a JS library
because...

2. externc generates ActionScript stubs from the externs. When we compile a
SWC from them, we get something kind of like playerglobal.swc, but for a JS
library. Something the compiler can use the check types, and an IDE can use
to suggest APIs, but not actually included in the output.

3. The SWF would compile, but you'd get runtime errors in Flash Player or
AIR because the libraries don't exist there.

- Josh
On Mar 13, 2016 9:46 AM, "Christofer Dutz" 
wrote:

> Hi Alex,
>
> having a look at everything I think I am figuring out how to build the
> externs:
> 1. Get the JavaScript code:
> - google_maps, jasmine, jquery, js are downloaded in
> compiler.jx/downloads.xml
> - cordova, GCL and node is manually checked in (Guess the input
> didn't work well with EXTERNC, so it was manually
>   tweaked instead of writing the replacement rules for it.)
> - createjs is downloaded by externs/createjs/build.xml
> In the end each directory contains an "externs" directory containing
> JavaScript input
>
> 2. Do some post processing by replacing stuff, that was probably causing
> problems with EXTERNC
>
> 3. Run EXTERNC to generate ActionScript from the JavaScript input and
> output that code to "out/as"
>
> 4. Use falcon to compile the code in "src" and "out/as" into an swc.
>
> Am I correct with this? If yes, it would have been great, if at least two
> externs would actually do it the same way ;-)
>
> In any case, I do have a few big questions:
> - What are externs?
> - What does EXTERNC actually do? The Input JavaScript files don't seem to
> contain any form of logic and only seem to be some sort of interface, but
> interfaces to what?
> - If EXTERNC generates an ActionScript stub to connect to the real lib in
> a real JavaScript environment, what happens if I do a Flash compile with
> externs?
>
> I think the best solution would be to provide a maven-plugin with 2/3
> goals:
> - prepare: to download/unpack any javascript resources and do the
> replacing of strings (executed in Mavens generate-sources phase). The stuff
> will be output to "target/generated-sources/externs-js"
> - externc: to generate the ActionScript code based on the "externs-js"
> JavaScript to "target/generated-sources/externs-as"(executed in Mavens
> generate-sources phase after the prepare goal) (Eventually I should merge
> both logical goals into one real one)
> - compile: a simple wrapper that passes the 3 or 4 commandline args to the
> falcon compiler to compile the sources in "src/main/flex" and
> "target/generated-sources/externs-as" into a SWC
> - Pull out the tests that use externs from compiler.jx as they seem to add
> a circular dependency between compiler.jx and the externs as I need the
> externs built in order to run some of the tests and I need part of
> compiler.jx to be built in order to build the externs. (Would suggest some
> sort of "testsuite" project, that could also contain the "SDKSWCTests" form
> the compiler package, which causes a similar circularity with the flex sdk
> and the compiler itself.
>
> Currently I used the exec-maven-plugin for both goals, but I guess a
> dedicated goal is easier to understand and makes the configuration a lot
> easier.
>
> Chris
>
> 
> Von: Alex Harui 
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 13. März 2016 15:26
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX
> 0.6.0
>
> On 3/13/16, 3:53 AM, "Christofer Dutz"  wrote:
>
> >Ok so it seems that I will have to convert each one into a dedicated
> >maven module. This will take some time :-(
>
> Unfortunately, that's probably

AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

[Christofer Dutz]

Hehe ... and I was confused why the mails kept sicking to my inbox and didn't 
move to the Flex folder ;-)

Chris


Von: Alex Harui 
Gesendet: Sonntag, 13. März 2016 15:20
An: Christofer Dutz
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 
0.6.0

OK, I'll cut a release branch soon.  I'm currently not worried about changes 
you are making to the develop branch as they aren't really that risky, but I 
guess we should practice really using a release branch where we can't merge 
from develop -> release.

BTW, the dev@ list isn't on this thread anymore.  If you agree we should add it 
back in, then please do so.

-Alex

From: Christofer Dutz 
mailto:christofer.d...@c-ware.de>>
Date: Saturday, March 12, 2016 at 11:48 PM
To: Alex Harui mailto:aha...@adobe.com>>
Subject: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

The problem is that I can't do changes to the tests themself in the Maven 
branch. So what I currently do, is fix the tests in Maven and develop a fix 
that runs on ant too. I then apply that fix to develop and make sure that it 
works in ant and commit it there.

Due to the major directory changes the meeting is very problematic.

Chris



Von meinem Samsung Galaxy Smartphone gesendet.


 Ursprüngliche Nachricht 
Von: Alex Harui mailto:aha...@adobe.com>>
Datum: 13.03.2016 06:04 (GMT+01:00)
An: Christofer Dutz 
mailto:christofer.d...@c-ware.de>>
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

If you need to commit stuff to the develop branch that is somewhat risky, then 
yes, I'll create a release branch.  IMO, it would be fewer total branches and 
merges if you just kept working in the maven branch.

Thoughts?
-Alex

From: Christofer Dutz 
mailto:christofer.d...@c-ware.de>>
Date: Saturday, March 12, 2016 at 1:15 PM
To: Alex Harui mailto:aha...@adobe.com>>
Subject: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0


I wasn’t planning on rushing Maven support, so I’m fine with that … after all, 
you’ll create a release branch and I can contiue working on develop (correct)?



Chris



Von: Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Gesendet: Samstag, 12. März 2016 21:39
An: Christofer Dutz 
mailto:christofer.d...@c-ware.de>>; 
dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0



We could set up ci builds on the maven branch now. I would prefer to release 
0.6.0 without mavens so we don't risk as much leading up to the San Francisco 
event on April 4.  After that would be better for me to make installer 
adjustment and release a 0.7.0 with mavens.  Would that work for you?



Sent from my LG G3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone



-- Original message--

From: Christofer Dutz

Date: Sat, Mar 12, 2016 11:01 AM

To: dev@flex.apache.org;

Subject:AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0



Well I'm currently down to 0 errors and failures for "compiler" and managed to 
get "compiler.jx" down to:

Tests run: 1274, Failures: 15, Errors: 26, Skipped: 9

I guess the ones still failing have to be related to the externs modules. These 
are the ones I'm dealing with at the moment.

Well I'm currently making great progress on this topic and hoping to have it 
finished till ApacheCon ... I just didn't want a release to hold me back for 
long. How long would I have to keep my feet still in case of a release?

Chris


Von: Alex Harui mailto:aha...@adobe.com>>
Gesendet: Samstag, 12. März 2016 16:09
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: LAST CALL] Release FlexJS/FalconJX 0.6.0

On 3/12/16, 3:56 AM, "Christofer Dutz" 
mailto:christofer.d...@c-ware.de>> wrote:

>I am currently on the finishing line of preparing falcon and falcon.jx to
>be converted to Maven.
>For this I will probably need to do a few more tweaks of the testsuite,
>but it's looking good.

Wow! Great progress!

>
>When are you planning on cutting the release branch?

Are you asking about getting the Maven integration into the 0.6.0 release?
 Or just trying to merge it into develop after I cut the release branch?

-Alex