Hi Guys,
I have one small change, not related with any issue. I would like to make
some methods protected in Jewel AlertView - Anyone would be against it ? I
will push the changes, but I wanted to let you know that I can revert it at
any time.
Thanks,
Piotr
pon., 23 sie 2021 o 23:04 Greg Dove
Sorry I should have followed up here yesterday.
Thanks for confirming that Yishay.
I pushed changes via dev to the 3 repos yesterday.
I don't really know the release workflow, but I think (after my attempts to
get familiar with it) that this is the way to fix the things that I raised.
Can
In the past we used to make changes to release and merge those into dev after
releasing. This has the benefit of protecting the release from untested changes
in dev and theoretically saving some time as some of the previous release steps
can be re-used.
Since there hasn't been a lot of
I have made changes locally which I believe address the things I was
concerned about. Can someone please advise : should these changes be pushed
to the 0.9.8 release branch or to develop? I think it is supposed to be the
release branch, and they will later be merged back to develop, but I just
Hi Josh,
Thanks for explanation. My expectation was just that if I run approval
script with switch for JS only tests - I would get JS only binaries after
final build. - This is not a blocker but everyone need to be aware that
build producing JS-SWF version.
wt., 17 sie 2021 o 18:46 Josh Tynjala
Good catch Greg. +1 for fixing this things. We have a lack of documentation
in many places, let's not make it worse.
śr., 18 sie 2021 o 00:00 Greg Dove napisał(a):
> I have started working through the ant approval script.
>
> Here are some things I noted so far:
>
> top level RELEASE_NOTES does
2021年8月18日(水) 7:00 Greg Dove :
> I have started working through the ant approval script.
>
> Here are some things I noted so far:
>
> top level RELEASE_NOTES does not mention anything about 0.9.8, only 0.9.7
>
> In the past it appears there has always been some summary entry for the
> latest
I have started working through the ant approval script.
Here are some things I noted so far:
top level RELEASE_NOTES does not mention anything about 0.9.8, only 0.9.7
In the past it appears there has always been some summary entry for the
latest release
royale-asjs has good updates for 0.9.8
In your screenshot, the left side looks like a JS-only distribution (except
for the extra player and air directories that are there, for some reason)
because frameworks/libs contains KeepsFBFromHanging.swc, while the right
side looks like a JS+SWF distribution with all of the framework SWCs.
It's
I went trough Approval script and everything goes fine. I have even tested
Maven artifacts to build our Apache Royale application - this one also went
fine. I have faced some wall when I wanted to try binary distribution which
was produced after build in Moonshine. When I try build Royale
This is great news
On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala,
wrote:
> Thanks again for the hard work, Yishay!
>
> I ran the approval script successfully, I confirmed that the royale-asjs
> works correctly for powering code intelligence in vscode-as3mxml, and I can
> compile and run
Thanks again for the hard work, Yishay!
I ran the approval script successfully, I confirmed that the royale-asjs
works correctly for powering code intelligence in vscode-as3mxml, and I can
compile and run asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC
Thanks Yishay! Congrats on that!. I will start looking into it later today
or tomorrow :)
pon., 16 sie 2021 o 10:15 napisał(a):
> This is the discussion thread.
>
> Thanks,
> Yishay Weiss
--
Piotr Zarzycki
This is the discussion thread.
Thanks,
Yishay Weiss
14 matches
Mail list logo
