You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@royale.apache.org by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org> on 2020/04/01 08:37:20 UTC
Some info from the current CI server emails
Hi,
taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step (until
step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server emails.
Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of server
hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
https://imgur.com/a/AgRH9cB
There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that step
1).
Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
understand some of the current problems we are having
HTH
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
RE: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Yishay Weiss <yi...@hotmail.com>.
Hi Alex, I’ll do my best to help. Thanks for working on it.
________________________________
From: Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>
Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 7:30:49 PM
To: dev@royale.apache.org <de...@royale.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
@Carlos, The information you are providing appears to be a misinterpretation of reality to suit your goals. It appears there is a double-standard. I would imagine that Chris and you made several edits to the pom.xml files beyond the ones that were actually pushed in a series of PRs. And nobody said that was a sign that Maven was too hard to work with.
The Maven build underwent some major refactoring. I am now trying to translate that into CI steps. It will take time. I'm not going to get it right the first time. Or the second. But with incremental improvements it will get better. First, though, I had to remove your credentials from the CI machine. I do not normally do that, so it took a significant amount of time to figure out. No other RM should have to do that, I hope. You can see that I was able to push some changes under your name. Then I found that the build.tools pom did not include the CI profile that was added to the main pom. And then Jenkins disconnected the slave. I sure wish we could spend our energy on figuring out why.
Yishay, if you have cycles to help fix the CI steps that would be great. They certainly can't be used as-is because of the changes to the Maven build. At minimum, I will work on them when I have time, and ask you to run them from time to time to make sure they work for you.
If we're lucky, we can do one step a day. The Maven changes added several steps for a separate build-tools release so that's where I'm starting now. The upside is that the "if utils" steps will go away and some of the instructions in the remaining steps will be simpler.
-Alex
On 4/1/20, 8:37 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi Yishay
thanks go ahead, and report you findings :)
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 14:28, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
escribió:
> Hi Carlos,
>
>
>
> I’m not yet convinced by Chris’s arguments. I think the quickest path to a
> release is for me to start one this evening using the CI server, which I
> intend to do unless anyone has objections to that.
>
>
>
> *From:* Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44:03 PM
> *To:* Apache Royale Development <de...@royale.apache.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
>
>
>
> Hi Yishay,
>
> if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM process
> available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for what I
> saw in his other thread response.
>
> About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris reported
> various times about that the new standard process is all what we need?
>
> He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
>
> Thanks
>
> Carlos
>
>
>
>
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> >
> > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need
> to
> > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> >
> > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise.
> > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of
> > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering
> > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by
> > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to
> vote
> > on that.
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> >)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on
> the
> > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice
> > but
> > > to use the CI server process.
> > >
> > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what
> > he’s
> > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the
> > release
> > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step
> > (until
> > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> > > emails.
> > >
> > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > >
> > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of
> > server
> > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
> > >
> > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2FAgRH9cB&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=t2tczUrAINKMRG9LJco3g7Ivxxohrgv5OFEakbf5q5Q%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that
> > step
> > > 1).
> > >
> > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > >
> > > HTH
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
>
> *From: *Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44 PM
> *Subject: *Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
>
>
>
> Hi Yishay,
>
> if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM process
> available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for what I
> saw in his other thread response.
>
> About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris reported
> various times about that the new standard process is all what we need?
>
> He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
>
> Thanks
>
> Carlos
>
>
>
>
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> >
> > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need
> to
> > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> >
> > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise.
> > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of
> > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering
> > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by
> > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to
> vote
> > on that.
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> >)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on
> the
> > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice
> > but
> > > to use the CI server process.
> > >
> > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what
> > he’s
> > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the
> > release
> > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step
> > (until
> > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> > > emails.
> > >
> > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > >
> > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of
> > server
> > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
> > >
> > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2FAgRH9cB&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=t2tczUrAINKMRG9LJco3g7Ivxxohrgv5OFEakbf5q5Q%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that
> > step
> > > 1).
> > >
> > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > >
> > > HTH
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Alex,
ok so seems that in that case we're on the same page
so no point to maintain the vote thread, going to cancel
Thanks!
Carlos
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 20:51, Alex Harui (<ah...@adobe.com.invalid>)
escribió:
> Not every change to Maven will require changing the CI steps. But if you
> change what people have to type, then yes, someone will have to update that
> on the CI server. And the advantage is that other people won't have to
> keep as careful track of the steps. It comes down to doing work to save
> other people time.
>
> On 4/1/20, 11:44 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 20:32, Alex Harui (<aharui@adobe.com.invalid
> >)
> escribió:
>
> > And remember, Yishay and I are taking over for what you promised to
> finish
> > and gave up on.
> >
>
> I never promised anything (I don't think you can find me saying that).
> I
> said that I'll do my best to make ir work again. Then we fixed many of
> the
> thing that break due to maven build changes and find that other things
> was
> broken like compiler not generating the same order in Mac and Windows.
>
> That's clearly nothing I break in the pass. It never worked. So that's
> not
> real. I gave up since the fix include change compiler to get real
> reproducible builds in all Timezones. So sorry, but that's not my
> fault at
> all.
>
> Finally I understand that each change in maven or ant in the future
> will
> break the process again due to its fragility.
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd717d474f54e43bc583808d7d66cb542%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213634692704713&sdata=o36Ub1eVpaID8%2FfynqipIeZWOit%2FxqFKOuvYHk0CbrQ%3D&reserved=0
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
Not every change to Maven will require changing the CI steps. But if you change what people have to type, then yes, someone will have to update that on the CI server. And the advantage is that other people won't have to keep as careful track of the steps. It comes down to doing work to save other people time.
On 4/1/20, 11:44 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi Alex,
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 20:32, Alex Harui (<ah...@adobe.com.invalid>)
escribió:
> And remember, Yishay and I are taking over for what you promised to finish
> and gave up on.
>
I never promised anything (I don't think you can find me saying that). I
said that I'll do my best to make ir work again. Then we fixed many of the
thing that break due to maven build changes and find that other things was
broken like compiler not generating the same order in Mac and Windows.
That's clearly nothing I break in the pass. It never worked. So that's not
real. I gave up since the fix include change compiler to get real
reproducible builds in all Timezones. So sorry, but that's not my fault at
all.
Finally I understand that each change in maven or ant in the future will
break the process again due to its fragility.
--
Carlos Rovira
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd717d474f54e43bc583808d7d66cb542%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213634692704713&sdata=o36Ub1eVpaID8%2FfynqipIeZWOit%2FxqFKOuvYHk0CbrQ%3D&reserved=0
Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Alex,
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 20:32, Alex Harui (<ah...@adobe.com.invalid>)
escribió:
> And remember, Yishay and I are taking over for what you promised to finish
> and gave up on.
>
I never promised anything (I don't think you can find me saying that). I
said that I'll do my best to make ir work again. Then we fixed many of the
thing that break due to maven build changes and find that other things was
broken like compiler not generating the same order in Mac and Windows.
That's clearly nothing I break in the pass. It never worked. So that's not
real. I gave up since the fix include change compiler to get real
reproducible builds in all Timezones. So sorry, but that's not my fault at
all.
Finally I understand that each change in maven or ant in the future will
break the process again due to its fragility.
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
Carlos, I did not say 13 complete days. I have other priorities I need to manage as well, so I will try to get some time to work on a step every day. And remember, Yishay and I are taking over for what you promised to finish and gave up on.
How many steps will there be? About as many as there are commands to be typed on the command line to build and validate a release on a local machine. That's really all the CI steps are. The CI steps just take what you would type and put it in a Jenkins job so you don't have to type as much.
The basic aspects of the release will have about the same number of steps as before. But whether you use CI or local machine the number of commands/steps increased in order to have a separate release for build tools.
-Alex
On 4/1/20, 9:51 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi Alex,
maybe, but I think is happening the same when you respond in the rest of
threads. I think you try to bring things to suit your arguments too, since
we many times talk about facts that use to be ignored and re-answered again
as if we don't respond already to it before.
That should not be the case if we all respect other ways to go. But for
whatever reason, we are not in that page.
Yishay, already offered to start now, but I think if we're going to have
even most steps as you think, that continue to be far away from what an
automated build system in a remote server should be. I think people was
expecting to ease things, and since right now we have 13 days plus 31
commands (until step 7), bring it more not seems to me the way to go.
How many steps you expect when finish? At a minimum all this means that
you'll need to invest 13 complete days of work in fixing something that can
fail again as any of us do a change in the future.
Even more, you can end with with the process working for you and the next
RM go and try and don't work for him.
Are you sure is worth the time invested?
And want the rest of people wait for it?
(if so I'm ok with that)
Thanks
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 18:31, Alex Harui (<ah...@adobe.com.invalid>)
escribió:
> @Carlos, The information you are providing appears to be a
> misinterpretation of reality to suit your goals. It appears there is a
> double-standard. I would imagine that Chris and you made several edits to
> the pom.xml files beyond the ones that were actually pushed in a series of
> PRs. And nobody said that was a sign that Maven was too hard to work with.
>
> The Maven build underwent some major refactoring. I am now trying to
> translate that into CI steps. It will take time. I'm not going to get it
> right the first time. Or the second. But with incremental improvements it
> will get better. First, though, I had to remove your credentials from the
> CI machine. I do not normally do that, so it took a significant amount of
> time to figure out. No other RM should have to do that, I hope. You can
> see that I was able to push some changes under your name. Then I found
> that the build.tools pom did not include the CI profile that was added to
> the main pom. And then Jenkins disconnected the slave. I sure wish we
> could spend our energy on figuring out why.
>
> Yishay, if you have cycles to help fix the CI steps that would be great.
> They certainly can't be used as-is because of the changes to the Maven
> build. At minimum, I will work on them when I have time, and ask you to
> run them from time to time to make sure they work for you.
>
> If we're lucky, we can do one step a day. The Maven changes added several
> steps for a separate build-tools release so that's where I'm starting now.
> The upside is that the "if utils" steps will go away and some of the
> instructions in the remaining steps will be simpler.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 4/1/20, 8:37 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Yishay
>
> thanks go ahead, and report you findings :)
>
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 14:28, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> >
> >
> > I’m not yet convinced by Chris’s arguments. I think the quickest
> path to a
> > release is for me to start one this evening using the CI server,
> which I
> > intend to do unless anyone has objections to that.
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44:03 PM
> > *To:* Apache Royale Development <de...@royale.apache.org>
> > *Subject:* Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Yishay,
> >
> > if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM
> process
> > available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for
> what I
> > saw in his other thread response.
> >
> > About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris
> reported
> > various times about that the new standard process is all what we
> need?
> >
> > He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > >
> > > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we
> need
> > to
> > > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> > >
> > > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread
> concise.
> > > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a
> list of
> > > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of
> gathering
> > > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed
> on by
> > > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need
> to
> > vote
> > > on that.
> > >
> > > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> > >)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a
> vote on
> > the
> > > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it
> stands
> > > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no
> choice
> > > but
> > > > to use the CI server process.
> > > >
> > > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on
> what
> > > he’s
> > > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on
> the
> > > release
> > > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> > <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> > <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server
> step
> > > (until
> > > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not
> necessary and
> > > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI
> Server
> > > > emails.
> > > >
> > > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us,
> started
> > > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from
> 6:57am to
> > > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > > >
> > > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because
> of
> > > server
> > > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not
> working
> > > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of
> us.
> > > >
> > > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2FAgRH9cB&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058332926&sdata=Hz4jvXLclkIxPGHxfh3IzoHZIxEMH7d5TCv6UApFtKg%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming
> that
> > > step
> > > > 1).
> > > >
> > > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > > >
> > > > HTH
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Carlos Rovira
> > > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058332926&sdata=kUOFLPh47s6RDMu8K01zjvZd5xug%2F9uCkj2vIH6oQOM%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058332926&sdata=kUOFLPh47s6RDMu8K01zjvZd5xug%2F9uCkj2vIH6oQOM%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058332926&sdata=kUOFLPh47s6RDMu8K01zjvZd5xug%2F9uCkj2vIH6oQOM%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > *From: *Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> > *Sent: *Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44 PM
> > *Subject: *Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Yishay,
> >
> > if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM
> process
> > available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for
> what I
> > saw in his other thread response.
> >
> > About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris
> reported
> > various times about that the new standard process is all what we
> need?
> >
> > He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > >
> > > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we
> need
> > to
> > > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> > >
> > > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread
> concise.
> > > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a
> list of
> > > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of
> gathering
> > > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed
> on by
> > > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need
> to
> > vote
> > > on that.
> > >
> > > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> > >)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a
> vote on
> > the
> > > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it
> stands
> > > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no
> choice
> > > but
> > > > to use the CI server process.
> > > >
> > > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on
> what
> > > he’s
> > > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on
> the
> > > release
> > > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> > <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> > <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server
> step
> > > (until
> > > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not
> necessary and
> > > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI
> Server
> > > > emails.
> > > >
> > > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us,
> started
> > > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from
> 6:57am to
> > > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > > >
> > > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because
> of
> > > server
> > > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not
> working
> > > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of
> us.
> > > >
> > > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2FAgRH9cB&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058332926&sdata=Hz4jvXLclkIxPGHxfh3IzoHZIxEMH7d5TCv6UApFtKg%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming
> that
> > > step
> > > > 1).
> > > >
> > > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > > >
> > > > HTH
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Carlos Rovira
> > > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058337906&sdata=If%2B0svUfF8gnnF80rhCoP6q4Xw8yxp0y2xgGvJ4uj5M%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058337906&sdata=If%2B0svUfF8gnnF80rhCoP6q4Xw8yxp0y2xgGvJ4uj5M%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058337906&sdata=If%2B0svUfF8gnnF80rhCoP6q4Xw8yxp0y2xgGvJ4uj5M%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058337906&sdata=If%2B0svUfF8gnnF80rhCoP6q4Xw8yxp0y2xgGvJ4uj5M%3D&reserved=0
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C4d5bc7f32b6f4f89704c08d7d65cf5b6%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213567058337906&sdata=If%2B0svUfF8gnnF80rhCoP6q4Xw8yxp0y2xgGvJ4uj5M%3D&reserved=0
Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Alex,
maybe, but I think is happening the same when you respond in the rest of
threads. I think you try to bring things to suit your arguments too, since
we many times talk about facts that use to be ignored and re-answered again
as if we don't respond already to it before.
That should not be the case if we all respect other ways to go. But for
whatever reason, we are not in that page.
Yishay, already offered to start now, but I think if we're going to have
even most steps as you think, that continue to be far away from what an
automated build system in a remote server should be. I think people was
expecting to ease things, and since right now we have 13 days plus 31
commands (until step 7), bring it more not seems to me the way to go.
How many steps you expect when finish? At a minimum all this means that
you'll need to invest 13 complete days of work in fixing something that can
fail again as any of us do a change in the future.
Even more, you can end with with the process working for you and the next
RM go and try and don't work for him.
Are you sure is worth the time invested?
And want the rest of people wait for it?
(if so I'm ok with that)
Thanks
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 18:31, Alex Harui (<ah...@adobe.com.invalid>)
escribió:
> @Carlos, The information you are providing appears to be a
> misinterpretation of reality to suit your goals. It appears there is a
> double-standard. I would imagine that Chris and you made several edits to
> the pom.xml files beyond the ones that were actually pushed in a series of
> PRs. And nobody said that was a sign that Maven was too hard to work with.
>
> The Maven build underwent some major refactoring. I am now trying to
> translate that into CI steps. It will take time. I'm not going to get it
> right the first time. Or the second. But with incremental improvements it
> will get better. First, though, I had to remove your credentials from the
> CI machine. I do not normally do that, so it took a significant amount of
> time to figure out. No other RM should have to do that, I hope. You can
> see that I was able to push some changes under your name. Then I found
> that the build.tools pom did not include the CI profile that was added to
> the main pom. And then Jenkins disconnected the slave. I sure wish we
> could spend our energy on figuring out why.
>
> Yishay, if you have cycles to help fix the CI steps that would be great.
> They certainly can't be used as-is because of the changes to the Maven
> build. At minimum, I will work on them when I have time, and ask you to
> run them from time to time to make sure they work for you.
>
> If we're lucky, we can do one step a day. The Maven changes added several
> steps for a separate build-tools release so that's where I'm starting now.
> The upside is that the "if utils" steps will go away and some of the
> instructions in the remaining steps will be simpler.
>
> -Alex
>
> On 4/1/20, 8:37 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Yishay
>
> thanks go ahead, and report you findings :)
>
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 14:28, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> > Hi Carlos,
> >
> >
> >
> > I’m not yet convinced by Chris’s arguments. I think the quickest
> path to a
> > release is for me to start one this evening using the CI server,
> which I
> > intend to do unless anyone has objections to that.
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44:03 PM
> > *To:* Apache Royale Development <de...@royale.apache.org>
> > *Subject:* Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Yishay,
> >
> > if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM
> process
> > available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for
> what I
> > saw in his other thread response.
> >
> > About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris
> reported
> > various times about that the new standard process is all what we
> need?
> >
> > He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > >
> > > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we
> need
> > to
> > > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> > >
> > > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread
> concise.
> > > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a
> list of
> > > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of
> gathering
> > > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed
> on by
> > > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need
> to
> > vote
> > > on that.
> > >
> > > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> > >)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a
> vote on
> > the
> > > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it
> stands
> > > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no
> choice
> > > but
> > > > to use the CI server process.
> > > >
> > > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on
> what
> > > he’s
> > > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on
> the
> > > release
> > > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> > <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> > <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server
> step
> > > (until
> > > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not
> necessary and
> > > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI
> Server
> > > > emails.
> > > >
> > > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us,
> started
> > > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from
> 6:57am to
> > > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > > >
> > > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because
> of
> > > server
> > > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not
> working
> > > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of
> us.
> > > >
> > > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2FAgRH9cB&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=t2tczUrAINKMRG9LJco3g7Ivxxohrgv5OFEakbf5q5Q%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming
> that
> > > step
> > > > 1).
> > > >
> > > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > > >
> > > > HTH
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Carlos Rovira
> > > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > *From: *Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> > *Sent: *Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44 PM
> > *Subject: *Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Yishay,
> >
> > if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM
> process
> > available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for
> what I
> > saw in his other thread response.
> >
> > About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris
> reported
> > various times about that the new standard process is all what we
> need?
> >
> > He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Carlos
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com>)
> > escribió:
> >
> > >
> > > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we
> need
> > to
> > > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> > >
> > > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread
> concise.
> > > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a
> list of
> > > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of
> gathering
> > > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed
> on by
> > > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need
> to
> > vote
> > > on that.
> > >
> > > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<
> yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> > >)
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a
> vote on
> > the
> > > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it
> stands
> > > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no
> choice
> > > but
> > > > to use the CI server process.
> > > >
> > > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on
> what
> > > he’s
> > > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on
> the
> > > release
> > > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> > <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> > <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server
> step
> > > (until
> > > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not
> necessary and
> > > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI
> Server
> > > > emails.
> > > >
> > > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us,
> started
> > > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from
> 6:57am to
> > > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > > >
> > > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because
> of
> > > server
> > > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not
> working
> > > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of
> us.
> > > >
> > > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2FAgRH9cB&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=t2tczUrAINKMRG9LJco3g7Ivxxohrgv5OFEakbf5q5Q%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming
> that
> > > step
> > > > 1).
> > > >
> > > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > > >
> > > > HTH
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Carlos Rovira
> > > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
@Carlos, The information you are providing appears to be a misinterpretation of reality to suit your goals. It appears there is a double-standard. I would imagine that Chris and you made several edits to the pom.xml files beyond the ones that were actually pushed in a series of PRs. And nobody said that was a sign that Maven was too hard to work with.
The Maven build underwent some major refactoring. I am now trying to translate that into CI steps. It will take time. I'm not going to get it right the first time. Or the second. But with incremental improvements it will get better. First, though, I had to remove your credentials from the CI machine. I do not normally do that, so it took a significant amount of time to figure out. No other RM should have to do that, I hope. You can see that I was able to push some changes under your name. Then I found that the build.tools pom did not include the CI profile that was added to the main pom. And then Jenkins disconnected the slave. I sure wish we could spend our energy on figuring out why.
Yishay, if you have cycles to help fix the CI steps that would be great. They certainly can't be used as-is because of the changes to the Maven build. At minimum, I will work on them when I have time, and ask you to run them from time to time to make sure they work for you.
If we're lucky, we can do one step a day. The Maven changes added several steps for a separate build-tools release so that's where I'm starting now. The upside is that the "if utils" steps will go away and some of the instructions in the remaining steps will be simpler.
-Alex
On 4/1/20, 8:37 AM, "Carlos Rovira" <ca...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi Yishay
thanks go ahead, and report you findings :)
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 14:28, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
escribió:
> Hi Carlos,
>
>
>
> I’m not yet convinced by Chris’s arguments. I think the quickest path to a
> release is for me to start one this evening using the CI server, which I
> intend to do unless anyone has objections to that.
>
>
>
> *From:* Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44:03 PM
> *To:* Apache Royale Development <de...@royale.apache.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
>
>
>
> Hi Yishay,
>
> if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM process
> available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for what I
> saw in his other thread response.
>
> About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris reported
> various times about that the new standard process is all what we need?
>
> He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
>
> Thanks
>
> Carlos
>
>
>
>
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> >
> > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need
> to
> > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> >
> > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise.
> > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of
> > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering
> > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by
> > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to
> vote
> > on that.
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> >)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on
> the
> > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice
> > but
> > > to use the CI server process.
> > >
> > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what
> > he’s
> > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the
> > release
> > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step
> > (until
> > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> > > emails.
> > >
> > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > >
> > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of
> > server
> > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
> > >
> > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2FAgRH9cB&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=t2tczUrAINKMRG9LJco3g7Ivxxohrgv5OFEakbf5q5Q%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that
> > step
> > > 1).
> > >
> > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > >
> > > HTH
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
>
> *From: *Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44 PM
> *Subject: *Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
>
>
>
> Hi Yishay,
>
> if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM process
> available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for what I
> saw in his other thread response.
>
> About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris reported
> various times about that the new standard process is all what we need?
>
> He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
>
> Thanks
>
> Carlos
>
>
>
>
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> >
> > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need
> to
> > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> >
> > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise.
> > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of
> > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering
> > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by
> > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to
> vote
> > on that.
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> >)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on
> the
> > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice
> > but
> > > to use the CI server process.
> > >
> > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what
> > he’s
> > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the
> > release
> > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step
> > (until
> > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> > > emails.
> > >
> > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > >
> > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of
> > server
> > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
> > >
> > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fimgur.com%2Fa%2FAgRH9cB&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=t2tczUrAINKMRG9LJco3g7Ivxxohrgv5OFEakbf5q5Q%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that
> > step
> > > 1).
> > >
> > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > >
> > > HTH
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5bbaa3cb9cea41c1bec108d7d6528955%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637213522292236235&sdata=5xI%2FintO7RBgxAl8ZmVyYNRYeuP1GRdAX2C%2FB4f4aZM%3D&reserved=0
Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Yishay
thanks go ahead, and report you findings :)
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 14:28, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
escribió:
> Hi Carlos,
>
>
>
> I’m not yet convinced by Chris’s arguments. I think the quickest path to a
> release is for me to start one this evening using the CI server, which I
> intend to do unless anyone has objections to that.
>
>
>
> *From:* Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44:03 PM
> *To:* Apache Royale Development <de...@royale.apache.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
>
>
>
> Hi Yishay,
>
> if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM process
> available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for what I
> saw in his other thread response.
>
> About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris reported
> various times about that the new standard process is all what we need?
>
> He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
>
> Thanks
>
> Carlos
>
>
>
>
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> >
> > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need
> to
> > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> >
> > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise.
> > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of
> > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering
> > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by
> > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to
> vote
> > on that.
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> >)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on
> the
> > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice
> > but
> > > to use the CI server process.
> > >
> > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what
> > he’s
> > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the
> > release
> > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step
> > (until
> > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> > > emails.
> > >
> > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > >
> > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of
> > server
> > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
> > >
> > > https://imgur.com/a/AgRH9cB
> > >
> > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that
> > step
> > > 1).
> > >
> > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > >
> > > HTH
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
> *From: *Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44 PM
> *Subject: *Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
>
>
>
> Hi Yishay,
>
> if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM process
> available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for what I
> saw in his other thread response.
>
> About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris reported
> various times about that the new standard process is all what we need?
>
> He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
>
> Thanks
>
> Carlos
>
>
>
>
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> >
> > >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need
> to
> > >vote, since I'm not with that.
> >
> > That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise.
> > It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of
> > requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering
> > the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by
> > Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to
> vote
> > on that.
> >
> > El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yishayjobs@hotmail.com
> >)
> > escribió:
> >
> > > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on
> the
> > > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> > > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice
> > but
> > > to use the CI server process.
> > >
> > > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what
> > he’s
> > > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the
> > release
> > > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > From: Carlos Rovira<mailto:carlosrovira@apache.org
> <ca...@apache.org>>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > > To: Apache Royale Development<mailto:dev@royale.apache.org
> <de...@royale.apache.org>>
> > > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step
> > (until
> > > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> > > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> > > emails.
> > >
> > > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> > > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> > > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> > >
> > > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of
> > server
> > > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> > > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
> > >
> > > https://imgur.com/a/AgRH9cB
> > >
> > > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that
> > step
> > > 1).
> > >
> > > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > > understand some of the current problems we are having
> > >
> > > HTH
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Rovira
> > > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
RE: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Yishay Weiss <yi...@hotmail.com>.
Hi Carlos,
I’m not yet convinced by Chris’s arguments. I think the quickest path to a release is for me to start one this evening using the CI server, which I intend to do unless anyone has objections to that.
From: Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44:03 PM
To: Apache Royale Development <de...@royale.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Hi Yishay,
if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM process
available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for what I
saw in his other thread response.
About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris reported
various times about that the new standard process is all what we need?
He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
Thanks
Carlos
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
escribió:
>
> >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need to
> >vote, since I'm not with that.
>
> That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise.
> It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of
> requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering
> the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by
> Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to vote
> on that.
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on the
> > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice
> but
> > to use the CI server process.
> >
> > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what
> he’s
> > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the
> release
> > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > From: Carlos Rovira<ma...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > To: Apache Royale Development<ma...@royale.apache.org>
> > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step
> (until
> > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> > emails.
> >
> > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> >
> > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of
> server
> > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
> >
> > https://imgur.com/a/AgRH9cB
> >
> > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that
> step
> > 1).
> >
> > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > understand some of the current problems we are having
> >
> > HTH
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
From: Carlos Rovira<ma...@apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Hi Yishay,
if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM process
available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for what I
saw in his other thread response.
About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris reported
various times about that the new standard process is all what we need?
He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
Thanks
Carlos
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
escribió:
>
> >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need to
> >vote, since I'm not with that.
>
> That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise.
> It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of
> requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering
> the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by
> Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to vote
> on that.
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on the
> > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice
> but
> > to use the CI server process.
> >
> > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what
> he’s
> > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the
> release
> > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > From: Carlos Rovira<ma...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > To: Apache Royale Development<ma...@royale.apache.org>
> > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step
> (until
> > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> > emails.
> >
> > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> >
> > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of
> server
> > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
> >
> > https://imgur.com/a/AgRH9cB
> >
> > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that
> step
> > 1).
> >
> > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > understand some of the current problems we are having
> >
> > HTH
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Yishay,
if we are not doing objections to any of us using any of the RM process
available is ok for me. But I though Alex was not on that page for what I
saw in his other thread response.
About technical requeriments. Are you ok with the evidences Chris reported
various times about that the new standard process is all what we need?
He responded again some minutes ago to the other list
Thanks
Carlos
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:19, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
escribió:
>
> >If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need to
> >vote, since I'm not with that.
>
> That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise.
> It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of
> requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering
> the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by
> Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to vote
> on that.
>
> El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
> escribió:
>
> > I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on the
> > remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> > today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice
> but
> > to use the CI server process.
> >
> > Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what
> he’s
> > doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the
> release
> > after that, hopefully this evening my time.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > From: Carlos Rovira<ma...@apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> > To: Apache Royale Development<ma...@royale.apache.org>
> > Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step
> (until
> > step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> > that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> > emails.
> >
> > Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> > CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> > 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
> >
> > And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of
> server
> > hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> > properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
> >
> > https://imgur.com/a/AgRH9cB
> >
> > There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that
> step
> > 1).
> >
> > Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> > understand some of the current problems we are having
> >
> > HTH
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Rovira
> > http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >
> >
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
RE: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Yishay Weiss <yi...@hotmail.com>.
>If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need to
>vote, since I'm not with that.
That’s why I wanted to keep the technical requirements thread concise. It’s not about whether or not to use the CI server. It’s about a list of requirements for any build method. Chris has done a good job of gathering the abstract requirements. We have one issue which is not agreed on by Alex, and having understood things better, myself. I think we need to vote on that.
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
escribió:
> I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on the
> remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice but
> to use the CI server process.
>
> Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what he’s
> doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the release
> after that, hopefully this evening my time.
>
> Thanks.
>
> From: Carlos Rovira<ma...@apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> To: Apache Royale Development<ma...@royale.apache.org>
> Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
>
> Hi,
>
> taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step (until
> step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> emails.
>
> Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
>
> And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of server
> hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
>
> https://imgur.com/a/AgRH9cB
>
> There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that step
> 1).
>
> Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> understand some of the current problems we are having
>
> HTH
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
Re: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Carlos Rovira <ca...@apache.org>.
Hi Yishay,
this are two things:
If we are discussing if we can use just CI Server, yes I think we need to
vote, since I'm not with that.
I'm for each RM take one of the valid ways.
The other thing is that if you want to take over is ok for me. I thing is
good for the project that other PMC experiment with the CI and see if get
what he expect will do.
Thanks
El mié., 1 abr. 2020 a las 11:07, Yishay Weiss (<yi...@hotmail.com>)
escribió:
> I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on the
> remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands
> today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice but
> to use the CI server process.
>
> Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what he’s
> doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the release
> after that, hopefully this evening my time.
>
> Thanks.
>
> From: Carlos Rovira<ma...@apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
> To: Apache Royale Development<ma...@royale.apache.org>
> Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
>
> Hi,
>
> taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step (until
> step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
> that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server
> emails.
>
> Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
> CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
> 8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
>
> And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of server
> hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
> properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
>
> https://imgur.com/a/AgRH9cB
>
> There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that step
> 1).
>
> Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
> understand some of the current problems we are having
>
> HTH
>
> --
> Carlos Rovira
> http://about.me/carlosrovira
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira
RE: Some info from the current CI server emails
Posted by Yishay Weiss <yi...@hotmail.com>.
I was hoping the technical requirements thread would spawn a vote on the remaining issues. If the result is that the maven solution as it stands today does not meet the agreed requirements then we will have no choice but to use the CI server process.
Assuming that’s the situation, I will wait for Alex to report on what he’s doing and if everyone else is ok with it I’ll start working on the release after that, hopefully this evening my time.
Thanks.
From: Carlos Rovira<ma...@apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 1, 2020 11:37 AM
To: Apache Royale Development<ma...@royale.apache.org>
Subject: Some info from the current CI server emails
Hi,
taking into account that Chris and I simplified each CI Server step (until
step 7) improving it but removing parameters that was not necessary and
that streamlined CI Server a lot, I want to analyze recent CI Server emails.
Alex, that is the most skilled in the CI Server steps from us, started
CI step 1 again. Just "CI Step 1" took him to complete from 6:57am to
8:14am (my time). That means more than one hour and a quarter.
And he had 3 fails as we can see in our emails. Probably because of server
hanging and he need to restart 3 times, or due to things not working
properly for him, what means the same can happen to the rest of us.
https://imgur.com/a/AgRH9cB
There's still 12 steps more, to do (and many more time consuming that step
1).
Just want to expose it to see if that helps all of us here to
understand some of the current problems we are having
HTH
--
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira