You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@royale.apache.org by ap...@gmail.com on 2021/08/16 08:15:14 UTC
[DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
This is the discussion thread.
Thanks,
Yishay Weiss
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Yishay! Congrats on that!. I will start looking into it later today
or tomorrow :)
pon., 16 sie 2021 o 10:15 <ap...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> This is the discussion thread.
>
> Thanks,
> Yishay Weiss
--
Piotr Zarzycki
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>.
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 <gr...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> 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 someone who does understand the release workflow please take a quick
> look at my last commits to see if there is anything else I missed. I tried
> to run the 'release' target locally to test it but I am not currently set
> up for the checkin-tests with the geckodriver or whatever it is. So I
> *think* it should be ok, but I was not able to fully test it.
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 2:11 AM Yishay Weiss <yi...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > 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 activity on dev since RC6, there's not
> > significant risk in simply creating another RC from dev. It would be
> easier
> > for me to follow the usual steps rather than figure out which steps are
> > needed. So I say commit your changes to dev, and I'll cut an RC7 from
> that.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > On 2021/08/22 02:23:54, Greg Dove <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 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
> > > want to verify that before I do anything.
> > > I should be able to push these tonight once I can be sure which branch
> I
> > > should commit them to.
> > >
> > > The changes do the following:
> > >
> > > -For 3 zero-byte font (.ser files) and 1 binary vector image file
> > > (.afdesign in
> frameworks\themes\JewelTheme\src\main\resources\afdesign) -
> > > exclude these from RAT reporting in the ApproveRoyale script - remove
> > > unnecessary noise
> > > -Include compiler's RELEASE_NOTES.md in release staging
> > > -update top level RELEASE_NOTES to include a 0.9.8 section (summary of
> > asjs
> > > and compiler changes)
> > > -update royale-typedefs RELEASE_NOTES to include a 0.9.8 section ('no
> > major
> > > changes')
> > > -minor changes to asjs RELEASE_NOTES and compiler RELEASE_NOTES (one
> > > addition to compiler, mostly fixing spelling errors/typos for the
> > remainder)
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Greg
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 12:21 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> > piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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 <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>
> > > > napisał(a):
> > > >
> > > > > 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 worth mentioning that a freshly downloaded JS+SWF binary
> > > > distribution
> > > > > is not currently supposed to contain playerglobal.swc, and you are
> > > > expected
> > > > > to add it manually (or another tool like Moonshine would do that).
> > It's
> > > > > quite possible that the ApproveRoyale script doesn't do that for
> > you, and
> > > > > you still need to do it manually.
> > > > >
> > > > > Technically, we are able to build a playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc
> > from
> > > > the
> > > > > asdoc XML using the playerglobalc tool I created, but that is not
> yet
> > > > > included in our distribution.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> > > > piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > 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
> > > > > application
> > > > > > I'm getting following error:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
> > > > > > frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs
> "Collections.swc",
> > > > > > "Basic.swc" etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
> > > > > > frameworks/libs/:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > frameworks/libs/air
> > > > > > frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Screenshot [2]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run
> > > > > approval
> > > > > > script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8
> -Drc=6
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any thoughts on this ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
> > > > > > [2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Piotr
> > > > > >
> > > > > > pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com>
> > > > > napisał(a):
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > This is great news
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <
> > > > > > joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > > > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Yishay Weiss
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Piotr Zarzycki
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Greg Dove <gr...@gmail.com>.
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 someone who does understand the release workflow please take a quick
look at my last commits to see if there is anything else I missed. I tried
to run the 'release' target locally to test it but I am not currently set
up for the checkin-tests with the geckodriver or whatever it is. So I
*think* it should be ok, but I was not able to fully test it.
Thanks,
Greg
On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 2:11 AM Yishay Weiss <yi...@apache.org> wrote:
> 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 activity on dev since RC6, there's not
> significant risk in simply creating another RC from dev. It would be easier
> for me to follow the usual steps rather than figure out which steps are
> needed. So I say commit your changes to dev, and I'll cut an RC7 from that.
>
> Thanks.
>
> On 2021/08/22 02:23:54, Greg Dove <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 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
> > want to verify that before I do anything.
> > I should be able to push these tonight once I can be sure which branch I
> > should commit them to.
> >
> > The changes do the following:
> >
> > -For 3 zero-byte font (.ser files) and 1 binary vector image file
> > (.afdesign in frameworks\themes\JewelTheme\src\main\resources\afdesign) -
> > exclude these from RAT reporting in the ApproveRoyale script - remove
> > unnecessary noise
> > -Include compiler's RELEASE_NOTES.md in release staging
> > -update top level RELEASE_NOTES to include a 0.9.8 section (summary of
> asjs
> > and compiler changes)
> > -update royale-typedefs RELEASE_NOTES to include a 0.9.8 section ('no
> major
> > changes')
> > -minor changes to asjs RELEASE_NOTES and compiler RELEASE_NOTES (one
> > addition to compiler, mostly fixing spelling errors/typos for the
> remainder)
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 12:21 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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 <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>
> > > napisał(a):
> > >
> > > > 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 worth mentioning that a freshly downloaded JS+SWF binary
> > > distribution
> > > > is not currently supposed to contain playerglobal.swc, and you are
> > > expected
> > > > to add it manually (or another tool like Moonshine would do that).
> It's
> > > > quite possible that the ApproveRoyale script doesn't do that for
> you, and
> > > > you still need to do it manually.
> > > >
> > > > Technically, we are able to build a playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc
> from
> > > the
> > > > asdoc XML using the playerglobalc tool I created, but that is not yet
> > > > included in our distribution.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> > > piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > 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
> > > > application
> > > > > I'm getting following error:
> > > > >
> > > > > "This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
> > > > > frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
> > > > >
> > > > > Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs "Collections.swc",
> > > > > "Basic.swc" etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
> > > > > frameworks/libs/:
> > > > >
> > > > > frameworks/libs/air
> > > > > frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
> > > > >
> > > > > Screenshot [2]
> > > > >
> > > > > Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run
> > > > approval
> > > > > script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8 -Drc=6
> > > > >
> > > > > Any thoughts on this ?
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
> > > > > [2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Piotr
> > > > >
> > > > > pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com>
> > > > napisał(a):
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is great news
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <
> > > > > joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Yishay Weiss
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Yishay Weiss <yi...@apache.org>.
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 activity on dev since RC6, there's not significant risk in simply creating another RC from dev. It would be easier for me to follow the usual steps rather than figure out which steps are needed. So I say commit your changes to dev, and I'll cut an RC7 from that.
Thanks.
On 2021/08/22 02:23:54, Greg Dove <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
> want to verify that before I do anything.
> I should be able to push these tonight once I can be sure which branch I
> should commit them to.
>
> The changes do the following:
>
> -For 3 zero-byte font (.ser files) and 1 binary vector image file
> (.afdesign in frameworks\themes\JewelTheme\src\main\resources\afdesign) -
> exclude these from RAT reporting in the ApproveRoyale script - remove
> unnecessary noise
> -Include compiler's RELEASE_NOTES.md in release staging
> -update top level RELEASE_NOTES to include a 0.9.8 section (summary of asjs
> and compiler changes)
> -update royale-typedefs RELEASE_NOTES to include a 0.9.8 section ('no major
> changes')
> -minor changes to asjs RELEASE_NOTES and compiler RELEASE_NOTES (one
> addition to compiler, mostly fixing spelling errors/typos for the remainder)
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 12:21 AM Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 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 <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>
> > napisał(a):
> >
> > > 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 worth mentioning that a freshly downloaded JS+SWF binary
> > distribution
> > > is not currently supposed to contain playerglobal.swc, and you are
> > expected
> > > to add it manually (or another tool like Moonshine would do that). It's
> > > quite possible that the ApproveRoyale script doesn't do that for you, and
> > > you still need to do it manually.
> > >
> > > Technically, we are able to build a playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc from
> > the
> > > asdoc XML using the playerglobalc tool I created, but that is not yet
> > > included in our distribution.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Josh Tynjala
> > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> > piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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
> > > application
> > > > I'm getting following error:
> > > >
> > > > "This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
> > > > frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
> > > >
> > > > Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs "Collections.swc",
> > > > "Basic.swc" etc.
> > > >
> > > > When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
> > > > frameworks/libs/:
> > > >
> > > > frameworks/libs/air
> > > > frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
> > > >
> > > > Screenshot [2]
> > > >
> > > > Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run
> > > approval
> > > > script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8 -Drc=6
> > > >
> > > > Any thoughts on this ?
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
> > > > [2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Piotr
> > > >
> > > > pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com>
> > > napisał(a):
> > > >
> > > > > This is great news
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <
> > > > joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> > > > > >
> > > > > 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Yishay Weiss
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Piotr Zarzycki
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Greg Dove <gr...@gmail.com>.
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
want to verify that before I do anything.
I should be able to push these tonight once I can be sure which branch I
should commit them to.
The changes do the following:
-For 3 zero-byte font (.ser files) and 1 binary vector image file
(.afdesign in frameworks\themes\JewelTheme\src\main\resources\afdesign) -
exclude these from RAT reporting in the ApproveRoyale script - remove
unnecessary noise
-Include compiler's RELEASE_NOTES.md in release staging
-update top level RELEASE_NOTES to include a 0.9.8 section (summary of asjs
and compiler changes)
-update royale-typedefs RELEASE_NOTES to include a 0.9.8 section ('no major
changes')
-minor changes to asjs RELEASE_NOTES and compiler RELEASE_NOTES (one
addition to compiler, mostly fixing spelling errors/typos for the remainder)
Thanks,
Greg
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 12:21 AM Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 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 <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>
> napisał(a):
>
> > 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 worth mentioning that a freshly downloaded JS+SWF binary
> distribution
> > is not currently supposed to contain playerglobal.swc, and you are
> expected
> > to add it manually (or another tool like Moonshine would do that). It's
> > quite possible that the ApproveRoyale script doesn't do that for you, and
> > you still need to do it manually.
> >
> > Technically, we are able to build a playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc from
> the
> > asdoc XML using the playerglobalc tool I created, but that is not yet
> > included in our distribution.
> >
> > --
> > Josh Tynjala
> > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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
> > application
> > > I'm getting following error:
> > >
> > > "This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
> > > frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
> > >
> > > Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs "Collections.swc",
> > > "Basic.swc" etc.
> > >
> > > When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
> > > frameworks/libs/:
> > >
> > > frameworks/libs/air
> > > frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
> > >
> > > Screenshot [2]
> > >
> > > Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run
> > approval
> > > script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8 -Drc=6
> > >
> > > Any thoughts on this ?
> > >
> > > [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
> > > [2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Piotr
> > >
> > > pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com>
> > napisał(a):
> > >
> > > > This is great news
> > > >
> > > > On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <
> > > joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> > > > >
> > > > 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Yishay Weiss
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>.
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 <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>
napisał(a):
> 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 worth mentioning that a freshly downloaded JS+SWF binary distribution
> is not currently supposed to contain playerglobal.swc, and you are expected
> to add it manually (or another tool like Moonshine would do that). It's
> quite possible that the ApproveRoyale script doesn't do that for you, and
> you still need to do it manually.
>
> Technically, we are able to build a playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc from the
> asdoc XML using the playerglobalc tool I created, but that is not yet
> included in our distribution.
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 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
> application
> > I'm getting following error:
> >
> > "This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
> > frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
> >
> > Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs "Collections.swc",
> > "Basic.swc" etc.
> >
> > When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
> > frameworks/libs/:
> >
> > frameworks/libs/air
> > frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
> >
> > Screenshot [2]
> >
> > Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run
> approval
> > script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8 -Drc=6
> >
> > Any thoughts on this ?
> >
> > [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
> > [2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Piotr
> >
> > pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com>
> napisał(a):
> >
> > > This is great news
> > >
> > > On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <
> > joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> > > >
> > > 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Yishay Weiss
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Piotr Zarzycki
> >
>
--
Piotr Zarzycki
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>.
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 <gr...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> 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 its RELEASE_NOTES
> royale-compiler has completely missing RELEASE_NOTES markdown file, in the
> . I don't understand why, because I can see the file in the repo and
> release branch, and it has updates for 0.9.8
> royale-typedefs does not mention anything about 0.9.8. In the past there
> have been explicit mentions of 'no major changes' between releases for
> typedefs
>
> I checked the 0.9.7 release checks and it appears it was also missing the
> RELEASE_NOTES.md for the compiler, so this might be an ongoing issue
> (perhaps it has even been raised before).
>
>
> I can't see anything that specifically mentions these issues with
> RELEASE_NOTES being a blocker in the release-policy, but it seems at least
> a quality issue to me. What do others think?
>
> -Greg
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 4:46 AM Josh Tynjala <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>
> wrote:
>
> > 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 worth mentioning that a freshly downloaded JS+SWF binary
> distribution
> > is not currently supposed to contain playerglobal.swc, and you are
> expected
> > to add it manually (or another tool like Moonshine would do that). It's
> > quite possible that the ApproveRoyale script doesn't do that for you, and
> > you still need to do it manually.
> >
> > Technically, we are able to build a playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc from
> the
> > asdoc XML using the playerglobalc tool I created, but that is not yet
> > included in our distribution.
> >
> > --
> > Josh Tynjala
> > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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
> > application
> > > I'm getting following error:
> > >
> > > "This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
> > > frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
> > >
> > > Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs "Collections.swc",
> > > "Basic.swc" etc.
> > >
> > > When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
> > > frameworks/libs/:
> > >
> > > frameworks/libs/air
> > > frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
> > >
> > > Screenshot [2]
> > >
> > > Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run
> > approval
> > > script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8 -Drc=6
> > >
> > > Any thoughts on this ?
> > >
> > > [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
> > > [2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Piotr
> > >
> > > pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com>
> > napisał(a):
> > >
> > > > This is great news
> > > >
> > > > On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <
> > > joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> > > > >
> > > > 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Yishay Weiss
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > >
> >
>
--
Piotr Zarzycki
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Takeshita Shoichiro <jl...@gmail.com>.
2021年8月18日(水) 7:00 Greg Dove <gr...@gmail.com>:
> 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 its RELEASE_NOTES
> royale-compiler has completely missing RELEASE_NOTES markdown file, in the
> . I don't understand why, because I can see the file in the repo and
> release branch, and it has updates for 0.9.8
> royale-typedefs does not mention anything about 0.9.8. In the past there
> have been explicit mentions of 'no major changes' between releases for
> typedefs
>
> I checked the 0.9.7 release checks and it appears it was also missing the
> RELEASE_NOTES.md for the compiler, so this might be an ongoing issue
> (perhaps it has even been raised before).
>
>
> I can't see anything that specifically mentions these issues with
> RELEASE_NOTES being a blocker in the release-policy, but it seems at least
> a quality issue to me. What do others think?
>
> -Greg
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 4:46 AM Josh Tynjala <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>
> wrote:
>
> > 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 worth mentioning that a freshly downloaded JS+SWF binary
> distribution
> > is not currently supposed to contain playerglobal.swc, and you are
> expected
> > to add it manually (or another tool like Moonshine would do that). It's
> > quite possible that the ApproveRoyale script doesn't do that for you, and
> > you still need to do it manually.
> >
> > Technically, we are able to build a playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc from
> the
> > asdoc XML using the playerglobalc tool I created, but that is not yet
> > included in our distribution.
> >
> > --
> > Josh Tynjala
> > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM Piotr Zarzycki <
> piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 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
> > application
> > > I'm getting following error:
> > >
> > > "This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
> > > frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
> > >
> > > Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs "Collections.swc",
> > > "Basic.swc" etc.
> > >
> > > When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
> > > frameworks/libs/:
> > >
> > > frameworks/libs/air
> > > frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
> > >
> > > Screenshot [2]
> > >
> > > Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run
> > approval
> > > script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8 -Drc=6
> > >
> > > Any thoughts on this ?
> > >
> > > [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
> > > [2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Piotr
> > >
> > > pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com>
> > napisał(a):
> > >
> > > > This is great news
> > > >
> > > > On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <
> > > joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> > > > >
> > > > 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Yishay Weiss
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Piotr Zarzycki
> > >
> >
>
--
Shoichiro Takeshita
武下 祥一郎
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Greg Dove <gr...@gmail.com>.
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 its RELEASE_NOTES
royale-compiler has completely missing RELEASE_NOTES markdown file, in the
. I don't understand why, because I can see the file in the repo and
release branch, and it has updates for 0.9.8
royale-typedefs does not mention anything about 0.9.8. In the past there
have been explicit mentions of 'no major changes' between releases for
typedefs
I checked the 0.9.7 release checks and it appears it was also missing the
RELEASE_NOTES.md for the compiler, so this might be an ongoing issue
(perhaps it has even been raised before).
I can't see anything that specifically mentions these issues with
RELEASE_NOTES being a blocker in the release-policy, but it seems at least
a quality issue to me. What do others think?
-Greg
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 4:46 AM Josh Tynjala <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>
wrote:
> 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 worth mentioning that a freshly downloaded JS+SWF binary distribution
> is not currently supposed to contain playerglobal.swc, and you are expected
> to add it manually (or another tool like Moonshine would do that). It's
> quite possible that the ApproveRoyale script doesn't do that for you, and
> you still need to do it manually.
>
> Technically, we are able to build a playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc from the
> asdoc XML using the playerglobalc tool I created, but that is not yet
> included in our distribution.
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 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
> application
> > I'm getting following error:
> >
> > "This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
> > frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
> >
> > Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs "Collections.swc",
> > "Basic.swc" etc.
> >
> > When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
> > frameworks/libs/:
> >
> > frameworks/libs/air
> > frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
> >
> > Screenshot [2]
> >
> > Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run
> approval
> > script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8 -Drc=6
> >
> > Any thoughts on this ?
> >
> > [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
> > [2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Piotr
> >
> > pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com>
> napisał(a):
> >
> > > This is great news
> > >
> > > On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <
> > joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> > > >
> > > 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Josh Tynjala
> > > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Yishay Weiss
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Piotr Zarzycki
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Josh Tynjala <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>.
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 worth mentioning that a freshly downloaded JS+SWF binary distribution
is not currently supposed to contain playerglobal.swc, and you are expected
to add it manually (or another tool like Moonshine would do that). It's
quite possible that the ApproveRoyale script doesn't do that for you, and
you still need to do it manually.
Technically, we are able to build a playerglobal.swc/airglobal.swc from the
asdoc XML using the playerglobalc tool I created, but that is not yet
included in our distribution.
--
Josh Tynjala
Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:59 AM Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 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 application
> I'm getting following error:
>
> "This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
> frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
>
> Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs "Collections.swc",
> "Basic.swc" etc.
>
> When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
> frameworks/libs/:
>
> frameworks/libs/air
> frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
>
> Screenshot [2]
>
> Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run approval
> script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8 -Drc=6
>
> Any thoughts on this ?
>
> [1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
> [2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
>
> Thanks,
> Piotr
>
> pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
>
> > This is great news
> >
> > On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <
> joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> > >
> > 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Josh Tynjala
> > > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is the discussion thread.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Yishay Weiss
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Piotr Zarzycki <pi...@gmail.com>.
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 application
I'm getting following error:
"This SDK does not contains playerglobal.swc in
frameworks/libs/player/11.7/playerglobal.swc."
Folder frameworks/libs - contains bunch of swcs "Collections.swc",
"Basic.swc" etc.
When I download nightly produced by Maven [1] I see in folder
frameworks/libs/:
frameworks/libs/air
frameworks/libs/player/20.0/playerglobal.swc
Screenshot [2]
Why they are so big differences ? I used following command to run approval
script: ant -e -f ApproveRoyale.xml -Drelease.version=0.9.8 -Drc=6
Any thoughts on this ?
[1] https://nightlies.apache.org/Royale/Royale-asjs/
[2] https://paste.pics/b034e5b11b9342184899e8f29b9887d8
Thanks,
Piotr
pon., 16 sie 2021 o 23:47 Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> This is great news
>
> On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <joshtynjala@bowlerhat.dev
> >
> 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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
> >
> > --
> > Josh Tynjala
> > Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > This is the discussion thread.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Yishay Weiss
> >
>
--
Piotr Zarzycki
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Andrew Wetmore <co...@gmail.com>.
This is great news
On Mon., Aug. 16, 2021, 3:22 p.m. Josh Tynjala, <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>
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 asconfigc for Node.js. Looks good to me.
>
> --
> Josh Tynjala
> Bowler Hat LLC <https://bowlerhat.dev>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > This is the discussion thread.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Yishay Weiss
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Royale 0.9.8 RC6
Posted by Josh Tynjala <jo...@bowlerhat.dev>.
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 <https://bowlerhat.dev>
On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 1:15 AM <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is the discussion thread.
>
> Thanks,
> Yishay Weiss