royale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carlos Rovira <carlosrov...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Make Jewel dependent on Basic (Re: [Discuss] Start release process 0.9.3)
Date Mon, 03 Sep 2018 08:28:13 GMT
Hi Harbs,

I'm available for you to help you solve. write me when you need.

Just a note: for doing this, I'll take the following path: I'll try to
compile and run without make Jewel depend on Basic, since is the actual
shape. From there I'll try to link Basic. I think that path will provide
you a more safe point from what you could go to next step. Just my advice
if you want to take it.

Thanks!

Carlos






El lun., 3 sept. 2018 a las 10:23, Harbs (<harbs.lists@gmail.com>) escribió:

> OK. Everything compiles now.
>
> I’m going to run the branch against some applications and see what
> happens. If you could do the same, it would be helpful.
>
> Carlos, I probably need some direction on how to test Jewel.
>
> Harbs
>
> > On Sep 3, 2018, at 10:38 AM, Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Ok! Again good luck! :)
> >
> > pon., 3 wrz 2018 o 09:34 Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> >
> >> The issues that I see with Jewel are related to the changes that were
> lost
> >> when you merged.
> >>
> >> I’m hoping I can resolve this quickly. Let’s see how over-optimistic I’m
> >> being… ;-)
> >>
> >> Harbs
> >>
> >>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 10:28 AM, Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Harbs,
> >>>
> >>> There is also another way. Maybe it is worth that I will spend couple
> of
> >>> hours on my branch and try to understand what was wrong. If I would
> >> manage
> >>> to do that - maybe you will be able to add your stuff on top of that ?
> Do
> >>> you see value in that approach ?
> >>>
> >>> I'm just afraid that doing again Jewel depends on Basic end up with a
> lot
> >>> of problems for you and delay for weeks that release.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Piotr
> >>>
> >>> pon., 3 wrz 2018 o 09:23 Piotr Zarzycki <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
> >>> napisał(a):
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Harbs,
> >>>>
> >>>> Looking forward to your changes. I'm just interested in release in
> >>>> whatever state it is and dealing with discussion later on.
> >>>>
> >>>> Btw. I have invested also at least 6h with merge stuff and as you can
> >> see
> >>>> it end up with bigger things. Good Luck! :)
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Piotr
> >>>>
> >>>> pon., 3 wrz 2018 o 09:18 Harbs <harbs.lists@gmail.com> napisał(a):
> >>>>
> >>>>> Right now, my priority is getting all three active branches combined
> >> with
> >>>>> all code working. That means MX/Spark, Jewel, and all the additions
> on
> >> the
> >>>>> revert branch all coexisting nicely in the merge branch.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I’m spending the better part of today on that.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I’d like to hold off on discussing where to go from here until
I
> >>>>> understand the issues you went through with Jewel better. I expect
> I’m
> >>>>> going to go through a lot of the pain you already went through
> already
> >>>>> getting Jewel to compile and work with the merges.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I might end up in the same place as you. Don’t know yet…
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I’m open to all possibilities. Even if we do separate depenendies,
> >> having
> >>>>> the dependencies even temporarily *might* help resolve some of the
> >>>>> underlying technical issues.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Let’s discuss when I come up for air… ;-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Harbs
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On Sep 3, 2018, at 9:17 AM, Carlos Rovira <carlosrovira@apache.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> considering making Jewel dependent on Basic. I'm trying to put
my
> mind
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>> that place. Since this is a huge effort for me, hope you all
try to
> do
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>> same as me and considering some thoughts, so we can plan something
> >> that
> >>>>>> works for all:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Since Basic will be the middle point between Core and Jewel,
can we
> >>>>>> consider to move Basic CSS and TLCS to a BasicUI swc? So Basic
could
> >> be
> >>>>>> really the common basic library and CSS doesn't mess Jewel things?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If so, we can go that router and test and discuss that integration
> in
> >> a
> >>>>>> separate branch and deal with all of that.
> >>>>>> this will inevitably delay the release, but maybe is time to
solve
> >> this
> >>>>>> first.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> One of the things to do in the final result is to compile Jewel
> (debug
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>> release) and comparte results on develop and results on integration
> >>>>> branch
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Then we can decide what's better and release that
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thoughts?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> El lun., 3 sept. 2018 a las 4:53, Alex Harui
> >> (<aharui@adobe.com.invalid
> >>>>>> )
> >>>>>> escribió:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> FWIW, I agree with Harbs.  Enough time has passed and changes
have
> >> been
> >>>>>>> made that it is time to try making Jewel dependent on Basic
so we
> can
> >>>>> see
> >>>>>>> in code (not words) what the problems are with doing that.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> My 2 cents,
> >>>>>>> -Alex
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Carlos Rovira
> >>>>>> http://about.me/carlosrovira
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>> Piotr Zarzycki
> >>>>
> >>>> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> >>>> <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>> Piotr Zarzycki
> >>>
> >>> Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> >>> <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> >
> > Piotr Zarzycki
> >
> > Patreon: *https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki
> > <https://www.patreon.com/piotrzarzycki>*
>
>

-- 
Carlos Rovira
http://about.me/carlosrovira

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