royale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzyck...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Royale] Using nightly builds
Date Thu, 05 Oct 2017 15:56:48 GMT
Nicolas,

I just download last JS only nightly and did quick check through the
Moonshine. I was able to build hello world project. Apart of that problem
with player global you should be able to run your build.
I'm wondering only why release version wasn't produced.

Let me know how it goes.

Thanks,
Piotr


2017-10-05 17:47 GMT+02:00 Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>:

> No problem! We are all here to help you :) Let me know about the progress.
>
> Piotr
>
> 2017-10-05 17:41 GMT+02:00 Idylog - Nicolas Granon <ngranon@idylog.com>:
>
>> Thank you for this information (I'm quite novice at the development
>> process...).
>>
>> I will double check the instructions.
>>
>> Nicolas Granon
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Message d'origine-----
>> > De : Piotr Zarzycki [mailto:piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com]
>> > Envoyé : jeudi 5 octobre 2017 17:36
>> > À : dev@royale.apache.org; ngranon@idylog.com
>> > Objet : Re: [Royale] Using nightly builds
>> >
>> > Nicolas,
>> >
>> > Validators are in branch feature/validation [1]. Nightly build is using
>> > branch "develop", once someone finish work on validation it will be
>> > probably merged to develop. - There is also option that you can
>> > yourself build SDK and try it out.
>> >
>> > As for your problems - if build produce correct JS output, I suggest
>> > raise issue in Josh's repository in case those missing playerglobal.
>> >
>> > Did you check this instruction [2] ?
>> >
>> > [1] https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/tree/feature/validation
>> > [2]
>> > https://github.com/BowlerHatLLC/vscode-nextgenas/wiki/Build-an-
>> > ActionScript-project-in-Visual-Studio-Code
>> >
>> > Piotr
>> >
>> >
>> > 2017-10-05 17:15 GMT+02:00 Idylog - Nicolas Granon
>> > <ngranon@idylog.com>:
>> >
>> > > There was a mistake in my previous message : The path to the SDK is
>> > in
>> > > settings.json, of course, not asconfig.json (working with VSCode).
>> > >
>> > > Well, I have changed the "nextgenas.sdk.framework" value (in
>> > > settings.json) to point to the correct folder.
>> > >
>> > > Relaunched a build (with -targets JSFlex only).
>> > >
>> > > I have the following errors in the "problems" panel.
>> > > The errors are cause by "flex-config.xml"
>> > > (the path to flex-config.xml is correct and I did not change anything
>> > > inside it)
>> > >
>> > > Errors showing in "problems" panel :
>> > >
>> > > Configuration variable compiler.fxg-base-class unknown Cannot open
>> > > (path to install folder)\frameworks\{playerglobalHome}\11.7\
>> > > playerglobal.swc
>> > > Cannot open (path to install
>> > > folder)\frameworks\{playerglobalHome}\11.7
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > However, the "terminal" panel says that the project was successfully
>> > > compiled and optimized.
>> > > And in fact, the js-debug folder content seems correct.
>> > >
>> > > It seems that the build task is looking for playerglobal, although
>> > > maybe it does not need it ???
>> > > Maybe same problem for the "compiler.fxg-base-class" error ?
>> > >
>> > > When using SDK 0.8.0 there are no problems in the "problems" panel,
>> > > but when I installed SDK 0.8.0, I launched the "installer.xml" ant
>> > > task after unzipping the bin archive.
>> > >
>> > > Also, there is something that I do not understand : I was expecting
>> > to
>> > > find the current version of Validator somewhere but I cannot find it
>> > > (testing Validator was the reason for grabbing nightly build).
>> > > I downloaded "apache-flex-jsonly-0.9.0-bin.zip". Is this the latest
>> > > nightly build ?
>> > >
>> > > Did I miss something ?
>> > >
>> > > Another question : in the "tasks", I have an entry for "build-debug"
>> > > but nothing for "build-release" ????? How do you launch a build-
>> > release task ?
>> > > Should I create it myself ? What keys and values should be there ?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Nicolas Granon
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > -----Message d'origine-----
>> > > > De : Piotr Zarzycki [mailto:piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com]
>> > > > Envoyé : jeudi 5 octobre 2017 13:20
>> > > > À : dev@royale.apache.org
>> > > > Objet : Re: [Royale] Using nightly builds
>> > > >
>> > > > I think that version of JS Only SDK was tested with Flash Builder
>> > > > and Moonshine IDE, but I'm not sure whether anyone is tried it to
>> > > > with VSCode.
>> > > >
>> > > > Piotr
>> > > >
>> > > > 2017-10-05 13:17 GMT+02:00 Piotr Zarzycki
>> > <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Actually not. I think you should be able use those version
>> > without
>> > > > any
>> > > > > additional steps.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Piotr
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 2017-10-05 13:11 GMT+02:00 Idylog - Nicolas Granon
>> > > > <ngranon@idylog.com>:
>> > > > >
>> > > > >> Should I launch :
>> > > > >> ant -f installer.xml
>> > > > >> after unzipping n a folder ?
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> Nicolas Granon
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> > -----Message d'origine-----
>> > > > >> > De : Piotr Zarzycki [mailto:piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com]
>> > > > >> > Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 22:55 À :
>> > > > >> > dev@royale.apache.org Objet : Re: [Royale] Using nightly
>> > builds
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > Good Luck! :)
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > Piotr
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > 2017-10-04 22:53 GMT+02:00 Idylog - Nicolas Granon
>> > > > >> > <ngranon@idylog.com>:
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > > No problem. I just did want to check that I had
a correct
>> > > > >> > > understanding
>> > > > >> > > *before* I begin !
>> > > > >> > > Thanks a lot
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > Nicolas Granon
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > > > -----Message d'origine----- De : Piotr Zarzycki
>> > > > >> > > > [mailto:piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com]
>> > > > >> > > > Envoyé : mercredi 4 octobre 2017 20:59 À
:
>> > > > >> > > > dev@royale.apache.org; ngranon@idylog.com
Objet : Re:
>> > > > >> > > > [Royale] Using nightly builds
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Hi Nicolas,
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > I believe it is enough. Did you experience
some problems ?
>> > > > >> > > > Of
>> > > > >> > course
>> > > > >> > > > since this is JS only you need to have in
your compiler
>> > > > >> > > > config
>> > > > >> > setup
>> > > > >> > > > - targets= JSFlex.
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Piotr
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > 2017-10-04 19:41 GMT+02:00 Idylog - Nicolas
Granon
>> > > > >> > > > <ngranon@idylog.com>:
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > I am not very familiar with the use of
"nightly builds".
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > Could you please confirm that I got it
right ?
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > 1 All that is needed is hosted at
>> > http://apacheflexbuild.
>> > > > >> > > > > cloudapp.net:8080/job/
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > 2 Get the build from  the "royale-asjs-jsonly"
folder
>> > > > >> > > > > 2.1 since I do not want to build from
source, I should
>> > > > >> > > > > get the -bin.zip file
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > 3 Create a folder and unzip the archive
in that folder
>> > > > >> > > > > (as I did for the last release 0.8)
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > 4 In the IDE (VSCode, in my case), point
to the said
>> > > > >> > > > > folder (modify the asconfig file)
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > Is this the correct way ?
>> > > > >> > > > > Is there anything else that I should
also get from the
>> > > > >> > > > apacheflexbuild
>> > > > >> > > > > site ? (compiler ?...)
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > Thank you,
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > Nicolas Granon
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > > -----Message d'origine----- De :
Harbs
>> > > > >> > > > > > [mailto:harbs.lists@gmail.com] Envoyé
: mercredi 4
>> > > > >> > > > > > octobre
>> > > > >> > > > > > 2017 15:37 À : dev@royale.apache.org
Objet : Re:
>> > > > >> > > > > > [DISCUSS] project vs. project name
>> > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > > Makes sense to me. But I do think
that we probably
>> > want
>> > > > >> > > > > > different release packages.
>> > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > > For someone who only cares about
JS compatible
>> > > > >> > > > > > components, they
>> > > > >> > > > have
>> > > > >> > > > > > no need to install anything Flash
related. For someone
>> > > > only
>> > > > >> > > > > > interested in outputting pure JS
and don’t need
>> > > > >> > > > > > components at all, they wouldn’t
need much more than
>> > > > >> > > > > > the compiler and some typedef swcs.
Different packages
>> > > > >> > > > > > should probably have different compiler
>> > > > >> > > > defaults.
>> > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > > The different release packages might
have different
>> > names.
>> > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > > > On Oct 4, 2017, at 1:24 PM,
Mark Kessler
>> > > > >> > > > > > <kesslerconsulting@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > > > Wouldn't we just release an
SDK instead?  Like
>> > Royale
>> > > > SDK
>> > > > >> > > > > > > and
>> > > > >> > > > skip
>> > > > >> > > > > > the JS part?
>> > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > > > -Mark K
>> > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 6:25
AM, Carlos Rovira
>> > > > >> > > > > > > <carlos.rovira@codeoscopic.com>
wrote:
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Hi,
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> my opinion on this regard
is that having many sub
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> names (aka product
>> > > > >> > > > > > names)
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> and packages will only
confuse people coming to
>> > Royale.
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> As well, I think we already
manage outputs via
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> compiler params
>> > > > >> > > > to
>> > > > >> > > > > > dictate
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> if we want to target one
or more outputs.
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> So I'll be more happy with
only one name and only
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> one
>> > > > >> > package
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> that
>> > > > >> > > > > > could
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> output JS, WASM, SWF, ....)
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> People coming from Flex
will find us and will know
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> we can be their
>> > > > >> > > > > > solutions
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Meanwhile people that search
for a frontend tech,
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> will come to read
>> > > > >> > > > > > about
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Angular, React, ...and
hope in some time Royale. We
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> don't want those people
be contaminated for old
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Flash
>> > > > or
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Flex that could
>> > > > >> > > > > > make
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> them not choose us for
something is not relevant to
>> > us.
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> So I think we should always
look forward and as we
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> decided
>> > > > >> > to
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> remove
>> > > > >> > > > > > "JS",
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> we should as well not have
a "FlexJS" version
>> > inside
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> That's my 2ctn
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Thanks
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Carlos
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> 2017-10-02 11:25 GMT+02:00
Erik de Bruin
>> > > > >> > <erik@ixsoftware.nl>:
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Hi,
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> With the renaming effort
planned to start right
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> after the
>> > > > >> > > > > > 'packaging'
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> branch lands, I think
it makes sense to discuss
>> > and
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> vote on the
>> > > > >> > > > > > naming of
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> the product(s) of this
project.
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Buried in another thread
Alex remarked the
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> following, which I
think
>> > > > >> > > > > > is an
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> excellent suggestion:
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> "When we were discussing
this earlier, we were
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> discussing two IDE-friendly
release artifacts, one
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> designed for folks
>> > > > >> > > > migrating
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> from Apache Flex and
>> > > > >> > > > > > another
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> for folks not interested
in SWF.  In the packaging
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> branch I
>> > > > >> > > > have
>> > > > >> > > > > > most of
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> that working.
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> We were discussing
calling the migration package
>> > > > 'FlexJS'
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> and the
>> > > > >> > > > > > other one
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Royale or RoyaleJS.
 The latter is considered by
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> some folks to mean
>> > > > >> > > > > > "Royale
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> for JS".  The package
names would be
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> apache-royale-flexjs-<version>
>> > > > >> > > > > > and
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> maybe apache-royale-royalejs-<version>.
The
>> > project
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> name would
>> > > > >> > > > > > definitely
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> be Royale but I think
we want to have artifacts
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> that denote target
markets."
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> A strong case has been
made to leave off the "JS"
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> off all but the legacy/migration
package, which
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> makes
>> > > > sense
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> to me
>> > > > >> > as well.
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> I think there are plans
to have this project
>> > create
>> > > > >> > multiple
>> > > > >> > > > > > product (e.g.
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> one that does AS3->WebAssembly),
so I do not think
>> > > > that
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> we should
>> > > > >> > > > > > name the
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> current product 'Royale'.
It will be increasingly
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> confusing to have
>> > > > >> > > > > > a
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> product with the same
name as the project and then
>> > > > have
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> other
>> > > > >> > > > > > products from
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> the same project with
totally different names. I
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> suggest we
>> > > > >> > > > come
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> up
>> > > > >> > > > > > with a
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> naming convention that
will reflect the
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> functionality of
>> > > > >> > the
>> > > > >> > > > > > various
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> products and their
link to the project. E.g. (off
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> the top
>> > > > >> > of
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> my
>> > > > >> > > > > > head, just
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> to show what I mean):
royale-as-js, royale-as-
>> > wasm,
>> > > > etc.
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> What do you think?
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> EdB
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> --
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Ix Multimedia Software
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> Jan Luykenstraat 27
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> 3521 VB Utrecht
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> T. 06-51952295
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> --
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> <http://www.codeoscopic.com>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Carlos Rovira
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Director General
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> M: +34 607 22 60 05
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> http://www.codeoscopic.com
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Conocenos Avant2 en 1 minuto!
>> > > > <https://avant2.es/#video>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> Este mensaje se dirige
exclusivamente a su
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> destinatario y puede
>> > > > >> > > > > > contener
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> información privilegiada
o confidencial. Si ha
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> recibido este mensaje
>> > > > >> > > > > > por
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> error, le rogamos que nos
lo comunique
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> inmediatamente por esta
misma
>> > > > >> > > > > > vía y
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> proceda a su destrucción.
>> > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> De la vigente Ley Orgánica
de Protección de Datos
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> (15/1999), le
>> > > > >> > > > > > comunicamos
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> que sus datos forman parte
de un fichero cuyo
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> responsable es
>> > > > >> > > > > > CODEOSCOPIC
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> S.A. La finalidad de dicho
tratamiento es facilitar
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> la
>> > > > >> > > > prestación
>> > > > >> > > > > > del
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> servicio o información
solicitados, teniendo usted
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> derecho
>> > > > >> > de
>> > > > >> > > > > > acceso,
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> rectificación, cancelación
y oposición de sus datos
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> dirigiéndose a
>> > > > >> > > > > > nuestras
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> oficinas c/ Paseo de la
Habana 9-11, 28036, Madrid
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> con la
>> > > > >> > > > > > documentación
>> > > > >> > > > > > >> necesaria.
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > --
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > Piotr Zarzycki
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > mobile: +48 880 859 557
>> > > > >> > > > skype: zarzycki10
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
>> > > > >> > > > <https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>
>> > > > >> > > >
>> > > > >> > > > GitHub: https://github.com/piotrzarzycki21
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> > >
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > --
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > Piotr Zarzycki
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > mobile: +48 880 859 557
>> > > > >> > skype: zarzycki10
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
>> > > > >> > <https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>
>> > > > >> >
>> > > > >> > GitHub: https://github.com/piotrzarzycki21
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Piotr Zarzycki
>> > > > >
>> > > > > mobile: +48 880 859 557 <+48%20880%20859%20557>
>> > > > > skype: zarzycki10
>> > > > >
>> > > > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
>> > > > > <https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > GitHub: https://github.com/piotrzarzycki21
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > >
>> > > > Piotr Zarzycki
>> > > >
>> > > > mobile: +48 880 859 557
>> > > > skype: zarzycki10
>> > > >
>> > > > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
>> > > > <https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>
>> > > >
>> > > > GitHub: https://github.com/piotrzarzycki21
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > Piotr Zarzycki
>> >
>> > mobile: +48 880 859 557
>> > skype: zarzycki10
>> >
>> > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
>> > <https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>
>> >
>> > GitHub: https://github.com/piotrzarzycki21
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Piotr Zarzycki
>
> mobile: +48 880 859 557 <+48%20880%20859%20557>
> skype: zarzycki10
>
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
> <https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>
>
> GitHub: https://github.com/piotrzarzycki21
>



-- 

Piotr Zarzycki

mobile: +48 880 859 557
skype: zarzycki10

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/piotrzarzycki
<https://pl.linkedin.com/in/piotr-zarzycki-92a53552>

GitHub: https://github.com/piotrzarzycki21

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