flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Avi Kessner <akess...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
Date Tue, 29 Oct 2013 12:20:44 GMT
Premature to 'woot! '?
On 29 Oct 2013 13:35, "christofer.dutz@c-ware.de" <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de>
wrote:

> Just got a Response:
>
> "Hi Chris, I will double check, but I am almost positive we signed this
> back when Marvin was actively maintaining flexmojos."
>
> So this Looks extremely positive :-) *amreallyexitedaboutthis*
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: Miguel Ferreira [miguel.cd.ferreira@hotmail.com]
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 29. Oktober 2013 10:42
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: RE: AW: AW: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
>
> That will be perfect.... and really really useful.
> Miguel
>
> > From: christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
> > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 10:17:26 +0100
> > Subject: AW: AW: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> >
> > I just signed up to the Mailinglist and sent an inquiry ... let's see
> what they answer. After all ... eventually they allready have signed an
> Agreement as Velo used to deploy stuff there ...
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > Von: Avi Kessner [akessner@gmail.com]
> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 29. Oktober 2013 10:01
> > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> >
> > If I knew how/what, I would contact Sonotype.
> >
> > brought to you by the letters A, V, and I
> > and the number 47
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:29 AM, christofer.dutz@c-ware.de <
> > christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:
> >
> > > Well I doubt it would be possible to Setup protected Areas as this is
> in
> > > contrast to the "public-repo" idea. But I would still prefer to have
> the
> > > fdk deployed somewhere reliable. I know in our Business things Change
> quite
> > > fast I wouldn't have immagined giving up my Consultant life and having
> a
> > > full employment doing GWT stuff one year ago. But things have changed,
> > > dramatically reducing the amount of time I have to develop the next
> Flex
> > > Maven plugin (Sorry for that). I just want to prevent that one day a
> > > posting Comes to this list, that the repo is offline because of
> whatsoever
> > > reasons. As Sonatype is running Maven Central I doubt that they will
> go out
> > > of Business soon, so for me it's currently the most reliable place in
> > > Addition to the fact that it should work with any Maven Installation
> out of
> > > the box.
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > ________________________________________
> > > Von: Frédéric THOMAS [webdoublefx@hotmail.com]
> > > Gesendet: Montag, 28. Oktober 2013 19:48
> > > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > Betreff: RE: AW: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > >
> > > > Well at sonatype they do distinguish between SNAPSHOT and Release
> > > Versions. So the process of updating SNAPSHOTS is far less complicated
> than
> > > that of deploying Releases
> > >
> > > Indeed but can I upload a zip instead of doing a deploy at sonatype? I
> > > never
> > > tried but actually, I wouldn't use the Deployer to do it, too
> consuming,
> > > especially for nightly builds.
> > > Can they / will create a single reader role for ApacheFlex to match the
> > > license policy requirement we have ? You've probably got more
> experiences
> > > with Sonatype and can probably surprise me.
> > >
> > > All in all, I prefer to keep control on the non-maven standard deploy
> > > process instead of being under the umbrella of Sonatype, I can revise
> my
> > > POV
> > > if the answer to those 2 question is YES though :-)
> > >
> > > > But I still think that your process of creating individual users will
> > > introduce some Problems (Settings.xml sharing)
> > >
> > > I can't see any other situations than the ones we have now, as
> explained
> > > before, today a user from the Adobe site, once accepted the license and
> > > downloaded an artifact can easily share it with no problems, idem from
> what
> > > the installer download, the same if I authorize a user (or a company)
> to
> > > download the SDK artifacts to its local/company repo after he accepted
> the
> > > licenses from the Installer (with the advantage here that a same
> artifact
> > > will be downloaded only once).
> > >
> > > Note: The actual license agreement is not nominative, so, I wasn't
> thinking
> > > about 1 credential per user but 1 credential for the accepted license
> > > agreement to match the same idea.
> > >
> > > Maybe there are situations I didn't considerate yet ?
> > >
> > > > Nevertheless ... I think I should make Flexmojos use the Apache GID
> ... I
> > > doubt I will find the time to work much on the new plugin in the near
> > > future
> > > and I would like to have promote the Apachiness of Flex ;-)
> > >
> > > I would wait for FM-Next, I wouldn't like to waste my time to
> re-mavenize
> > > and re-deploy all the Flex/Air SDKs even if in case you do it, I will
> ;-)
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Fred
> > >
> > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > De : christofer.dutz@c-ware.de [mailto:christofer.dutz@c-ware.de]
> > > Envoyé : lundi 28 octobre 2013 16:22
> > > À : dev@flex.apache.org
> > > Objet : AW: AW: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > >
> > > Well at sonatype they do distinguish between SNAPSHOT and Release
> Versions.
> > > So the process of updating SNAPSHOTS is far less complicated than that
> of
> > > deploying Releases. But I still think that your process of creating
> > > individual users will introduce some Problems (Settings.xml sharing)
> > >
> > > Nevertheless ... I think I should make Flexmojos use the Apache GID
> ... I
> > > doubt I will find the time to work much on the new plugin in the near
> > > future
> > > and I would like to have promote the Apachiness of Flex ;-)
> > >
> > > Chris
> > >
> > > ________________________________________
> > > Von: Frédéric THOMAS [webdoublefx@hotmail.com]
> > > Gesendet: Montag, 28. Oktober 2013 16:07
> > > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > Betreff: RE: AW: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > >
> > > Chris,
> > >
> > > Do you think Sonatype would allows the creation of specific user
> granted to
> > > download the SDK ? It would be nice but I'm not sure, plus I would
> need to
> > > deal with their heavy process to deal with snapshot and release on
> > > non-maven
> > > built projects, I don't today, I just upload a zip and tomorrow, I will
> > > just
> > > tell jenkins to deploy the build (mavenized SDK) to Artifactory, not
> sure
> > > it
> > > is as easy as that with sonatype, at least from what I remember.
> > >
> > > What do you think ?
> > >
> > > Frédéric THOMAS
> > >
> > > > From: christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
> > > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > > Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 14:18:50 +0100
> > > > Subject: AW: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > > >
> > > > Well in that case, I would opt for creating an Apache Flex account at
> > > sonatype and to Stage and Deploy stuff there ... (The way Velo did it)
> ...
> > > I
> > > guess there is legally no real difference between a Company repo and
> the
> > > big
> > > sonatype repo. Actually we don't have permission to publish stuff in
> either
> > > solution.
> > > >
> > > > This is also where I deploy the Flexmojos Libs as well as I helped
> deploy
> > > the latest FlexUnit release.
> > > >
> > > > On the cool side this is probably allready in the list of allmost all
> > > Major Nexus/Artifactory/Whatsoever instances and therefore there would
> > > probably not be any Problems with accessing the artifacts. But if such
> an
> > > Approach would be taken, I guess I would create a new Major Version of
> > > Flexmojos, which runs on Apache Flex's GID org.apache.flex instead of
> the
> > > current com.adobe.flex.
> > > >
> > > > Chris
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________________
> > > > Von: Frédéric THOMAS [webdoublefx@hotmail.com]
> > > > Gesendet: Montag, 28. Oktober 2013 13:42
> > > > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > > Betreff: RE: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > > >
> > > > You're right, that's my exp too but from the company I'm working for
> > > > at the moment, this is the only way as the installer doesn't work
> from
> > > > here plus,I don't think an ApacheFlex VM managed by PMCs and almost
> > > > dedicated to it will be "no-name" for long time :-)
> > > >
> > > > Frédéric THOMAS
> > > >
> > > > > From: christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
> > > > > To: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > > > Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:18:48 +0100
> > > > > Subject: AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > > > >
> > > > > But from my experiance it is usually more difficult to convince the
> > > Company-Repo admins to add a "no-name" repo as source. At least most
> of the
> > > companies I've worked for. And deploying of a new Flex Version would
> > > probably not be done by any ordinary developer, but by one Special
> Person
> > > that is permitted to do so.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________________
> > > > > Von: Frédéric THOMAS [webdoublefx@hotmail.com]
> > > > > Gesendet: Montag, 28. Oktober 2013 10:53
> > > > > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > > > Betreff: RE: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > > > >
> > > > > 1- I'm short of time at the moment and that's a long run even
> > > > > without thinking to integrate with the actual code
> > > > > 2- Anyway, before I integrate anything in the actual code of the
> > > > > installer, its code needs to be refactored
> > > > > 3- There's no jar produced at the moment for the converter, that
> > > > > something to be considered too.
> > > > > 4- It's not allowed in every company the user can manage the repo
> he
> > > > > wants to access, in big ones, he has to go by the company one which
> > > > > in return, proxied the repo they choose.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Fred
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > > > De : christofer.dutz@c-ware.de [mailto:christofer.dutz@c-ware.de]
> > > > > Envoyé : lundi 28 octobre 2013 10:43 À : dev@flex.apache.orgObjet
:
> > > > > AW: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > > > >
> > > > > Still I can't really see what would be the Problem to add the
> > > > > mavenizer to the Installer? I guess this would resolve any legal
> > > > > Problems. I do see some Major Speed improvement Option to Switch
> the
> > > > > Deployer to use Mavens wagon instead of making hundreds of
> > > > > mvn-calls, but adding the mavenizer to the installer still seems
> to be
> > > the best Option from my Point of view.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________________________________
> > > > > Von: Frédéric THOMAS [webdoublefx@hotmail.com]
> > > > > Gesendet: Montag, 28. Oktober 2013 10:17
> > > > > An: dev@flex.apache.org
> > > > > Betreff: RE: Add Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Justin,
> > > > >
> > > > > >What to stop users sharing that URL and/or user credentials
> around?
> > > > >
> > > > > I thought about it too and ended to think I don't want to add more
> > > > > restrictions than what exists today, I mean today, once you
> accepted
> > > > > a license and downloaded an Adobe Artifact, you can share it as you
> > > > > like, that's not even nominative.
> > > > > I just want to replicate the actual security, so, yes, if an user
> > > > > wants to share the credentials, it can do it, as it can do it with
> > > > > the artifact itself.
> > > > >
> > > > > > As long as you make it clear that these are not official releases
> > > > > > and for
> > > > > development use only as per Apache policy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Np, it will be suffixed with "-SNAPSHOT " with means in Maven,
> > > > > non-released
> > > > >
> > > > > > Could it cope with it load and the costs that is likely to incur
> > > > > > (assume
> > > > > 100 or 200 installs a day)? Who owns and maintains the server?
> Could
> > > > > the apache Flex PMC be given access to it?
> > > > >
> > > > > From what I understand, I'm not charged or should be very low rate,
> > > > > I will verify anyway, can't do it now, windowsazure has a 401.
> > > > > I own and maintain the server, it is the same kind than the Erik
> > > > > ones, it will serve me for some of my devs too (probably) or / and
> > > > > to test the SDK RCs and I can give access to PMCs who ask me.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > -Fred
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Message d'origine-----
> > > > > De : Justin Mclean [mailto:justin@classsoftware.com] Envoyé :
> lundi
> > > > > 28 octobre 2013 10:03 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Add
> > > > > Mavenizer functionality to Installer
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > > From the Installer, users already have to accept licenses for
the
> > > > > > third party artifacts, for those users I can grant access to
a
> > > > > > online maven repo which serves the Mavenized SDKs
> > > > > What to stop users sharing that URL and/or user credentials around?
> > > > >
> > > > > > I can even add the lasts nightly mavenized build versions.
> > > > > As long as you make it clear that these are not official releases
> > > > > and for development use only as per Apache policy.
> > > > >
> > > > > > The server exist today as it serves me, it serves up to the
4.11
> > > > > > version
> > > > > Could it cope with it load and the costs that is likely to incur
> > > > > (assume 100 or 200 installs a day)? Who owns and maintains the
> > > > > server? Could the apache Flex PMC be given access to it?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Justin
> > >

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message