flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Apache Flex 4.11.0 RC 1
Date Mon, 14 Oct 2013 14:42:56 GMT

On 10/14/13 2:06 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <erik@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:

>> I think (even though it's a little painful) we have go with the tests
>>passing as tagged (even though they are not part of the source release)
>>otherwise a new RC is needed. Otherwise there's no way of reproducing
>>the test results accurately. In this case carrying over the previous
>>votes would apply.
>In case of a new RC where I could test everything in a fresh copy,
>without modification, I'd most likely change my vote to +1.
For the record, I do not test against the branches or tags.  I expand the
source package and build it, then set FLEX_HOME to point to it, then from
my git repo I run mustella.  IMO, that's a better test than building and
testing from the repo and tags because the source-package contains a
subset of files from the repo and we want to make sure there is nothing
missing.  The output from mustella tells me it is picking up the
flex-config from the expanded source package so I know I'm getting those
SWCs.  Now there could be a flaw in that logic, but that's how I've been

And that's why I can vote +1.  There is nothing required to change in the
RC1 source package.  We could have someone temporarily revert Maurice's DG
fix and build an RC2 and it would be identical to RC1.  And if we do
decide to do an RC2 to pick up these optional changes then I would spot
test a few things and carryover my vote.  I would also diff the RC2
against RC2 to verify that only the things I spot tested are different,
but that's a lot less work than tying up two machines for 10 hours to run
full mustella on them.


View raw message