royale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosma...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: NPM for Royale (was Re: Repos and Releases)
Date Sun, 17 Dec 2017 08:25:20 GMT
I'm making progress on this front.

I will get the apache-royale npm package first.  Let's test this out and
figure out the next steps for the one with swf version.

Would it be better to call it apache-royale-with-air instead of
apache-royale-with-swf?

Thanks,
Om

On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.invalid>
wrote:

> OK, we can stick with two standalone packages.
>
> FWIW, the CI build finished and I successfully ran:
>
> sudo npm install -g
> http://apacheflexbuild.cloudapp.net:8080/job/royale-
> asjs/lastSuccessfulBuil
> d/artifact/out/apache-royale-jsonly-0.9.0-bin.tar.gz
>
> The npm progress bar did not show anything at all during the download and
> unpacking.  I don't know if it is supposed to or not.  Could be something
> about the CI server that does not return progress info.  So the UI did
> nothing for quite a while, then it ran the rest of the install.
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 12/12/17, 12:13 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> Muppirala" <omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.invalid>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> FWIW, we also have the option of making the SWF support more of an
> >> "add-on" instead of its own package.  IOW, right now both packages
> >>contain
> >> mostly the same files and the SWF support is additional files and some
> >> slightly different settings.
> >>
> >> An add-on package would just contain the additional files and settings
> >>so
> >> to get SWF support you would have to "npm install" two packages.
> >>
> >> I don't think I care which way we go on that.
> >>
> >> -Alex
> >>
> >
> >The problem with this approach is that the npm install scripts need to
> >know
> >the logic of where the additional files should go.  I would rather have
> >the
> >release build scripts contain all that logic.  So, the npm install scripts
> >would simply download the zip/tar of the release artifact.  Then download
> >external dependencies if needed.
> >This way, we can change the folder structure all we want, without having
> >to
> >redo the logic in the npm installer scripts.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Om
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On 12/12/17, 11:17 AM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> >> Muppirala" <omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I think it would be good if we do: apache-royale-x.x.x and
> >> >apache-royale-with-swf-x.x.x.
> >> >That makes it much clearer.
> >> >
> >> >Thanks,
> >> >Om
> >> >
> >> >On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com.invalid
> >
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> OK, I think I got the packaging fixed.  The CI server is building it
> >>and
> >> >> should finish in 90 minutes or so.
> >> >>
> >> >> You can try it out locally if you want by syncing up and running "ant
> >> >> release" and pointing NPM at the tar.gz file in the out folder.  I
> >>think
> >> >> you need to "npm uninstall flexjs" first.  I only tried the -jsonly-
> >> >> package and it installed for me.  I didn't do any further testing to
> >>see
> >> >> if the command-line scripts worked or not.  If you run against the
> >>other
> >> >> -bin.tar.gz it should try to run the code that downloads Adobe stuff,
> >> >> which might need tuning.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm thinking we should create s.apache.org URLs for the nightly
> >>builds
> >> >>so
> >> >> you could do something like:
> >> >>
> >> >>   npm install
> >>
> >>>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> http%3A%2F%2Fs.apach
> >>>>e
> >> .
> >> >>org%2FRoyale090NightlyBuild&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com
> >> %7C5cf18485a
> >> >>7ea436ab37008d541952581%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178de
> >> cee1%7C0%7C0%7C6364
> >> >>87031193280540&sdata=YTCxCqR%2Brex4xYW1l%2B0SL2Yl5d1DeLXLeukb7JyT8Ls%
> >> 3D&r
> >> >>eserved=0
> >> >>
> >> >> But before we do that, we should decide on the package names.  Right
> >>now
> >> >> it is:
> >> >>
> >> >>   apache-royale-0.9.0-bin  This contains SWF support.
> >> >>   apache-royale-jsonly-0.9.0.bin
> >> >>
> >> >> A while back I suggested:
> >> >>
> >> >>   apache-royale-flexjs-0.9.0-bin  This contains SWF support.
> >> >>   apache-royale-0.9.0.bin  The default package is JS only.
> >> >>
> >> >> Another option is:
> >> >>
> >> >>   apache-royale-swf-0.9.0-bin This contains SWF support.
> >> >>   apache-royale-0.9.0.bin  The default package is JS only.
> >> >>
> >> >> I still think it might be valuable to have 'flexjs' in the package
> >>name
> >> >> for the package with SWF support.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Thoughts?
> >> >> -Alex
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 12/12/17, 10:18 AM, "Alex Harui" <aharui@adobe.com.INVALID>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >The package on the CI server aren't working with NPM.  I think
I
> >> >>messed up
> >> >> >the Ant script.  Looking into it now.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >-Alex
> >> >> >
> >> >> >On 12/12/17, 10:10 AM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> >> >> >Muppirala" <omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>On Dec 12, 2017 8:41 AM, "Alex Harui" <aharui@adobe.com.invalid>
> >> >>wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>On 12/12/17, 3:51 AM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash
> >> >> >>Muppirala"
> >> >> >><omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>>On Dec 12, 2017 12:25 AM, "Alex Harui" <aharui@adobe.com.invalid>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>I just pushed changes to see if it can work.  We'll see
after the
> >>CI
> >> >> >>>server builds it.  In theory, you will be able to run:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>    npm install
> >> >> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> http%3A%2F%2Fapachefl
> >> >> >>>e
> >> >> >>>x
> >> >> >>>build.cloudapp.net%3A8080%2Fjob%2Froyale-asjs%
> >> >> 2FlastSuccessfulBuil&data=
> >> >> >>>0
> >> >> >>>2
> >> >> >>>%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5d4cb0a761544b1e6dce08d54156
> >> >> c7cb%7Cfa7b1b5a
> >> >> >>>7
> >> >> >>>b
> >> >> >>>34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636486763331683835&
> >> >> sdata=99F1YaFJunpkbE
> >> >> >>>E
> >> >> >>>Z
> >> >> >>>WSuZdiO2LJAEHAud55Tq5tx%2FYnM%3D&reserved=0
> >> >> >>>d/artifact/out/apache-royale-jsonly-0.9.0-bin.tar.gz
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>And it should install the JSOnlu package.  Alternatively,
you run:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>    npm install
> >> >> >>>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> >> >> http%3A%2F%2Fapachefl
> >> >> >>>e
> >> >> >>>x
> >> >> >>>build.cloudapp.net%3A8080%2Fjob%2Froyale-asjs%
> >> >> 2FlastSuccessfulBuil&data=
> >> >> >>>0
> >> >> >>>2
> >> >> >>>%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C5d4cb0a761544b1e6dce08d54156
> >> >> c7cb%7Cfa7b1b5a
> >> >> >>>7
> >> >> >>>b
> >> >> >>>34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636486763331683835&
> >> >> sdata=99F1YaFJunpkbE
> >> >> >>>E
> >> >> >>>Z
> >> >> >>>WSuZdiO2LJAEHAud55Tq5tx%2FYnM%3D&reserved=0
> >> >> >>>d/artifact/out/apache-royale-0.9.0-bin.tar.gz
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>Does this tarball contain the Adobe dependencies as well?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>No, it will try to download the Adobe stuff like the earlier
> >> >>npm-flexjs
> >> >> >>code did.  However, it only need to try to get the Adobe stuff
> >>since
> >> >> >>other
> >> >> >>things it looks like it used to download are in the package
> >> >>(framework,
> >> >> >>falcon, swfobject).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Thanks,
> >> >> >>-Alex
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Sounds good.  I will start working on this today.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Thanks,
> >> >> >>Om
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

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