weex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From 申远 <shenyua...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Weex 0.24.0 Released
Date Wed, 29 May 2019 14:14:49 GMT
It occurred to me that the following job need to be done to publish Weex
Playground in the name of ASF:

   1. Separate weex_sdk and weex_playground into two git repositories.
   2. Configure ASF's apple developer's account and import fastlane if
   possible.
   3. Do an official release for weex_playground.
   4. Publish iOS Weex Playground to Apple App Store in the name of Apache
   as a convenience binary.
   5. Publish Android Weex Playground to somewhere in Weex website.

The question here is that Weex Playground has compiling and runtime
dependency on weex_sdk and Weex Playground may not changed over a year
while weex_sdk may get changed every day. Is it suitable or necessary to do
an Apache release for Weex Playground when only pom/gradle dependency
change in weex playground over time and the code itself remain the same.
Let's suppose that the only difference between Weex Playground V1 and V2 is
that V1 relies on  "compile 'com.taobao.android:weex_sdk:0.24.0'" while V2
relies on "compile 'com.taobao.android:weex_sdk:0.25.0'".  And this could
happens over and over again.

Best Regards,
YorkShen

申远


Jan Piotrowski <piotrowski@gmail.com> 于2019年5月29日周三 下午5:59写道:

> Awesome that INFRA already has the iOS account in place!
>
> Just for the record: We can of course do all the publishing manually
> for iOS without fastlane, should be pretty trivial.
>
> For Android, you are correct that fastlane does not support many
> Chinese Android app stores - yet. I would be happy to work with you on
> creating plugins for fastlane to automate the publishing on those
> markets, if possible. I am pretty sure, many are already covered with
> plugins published on GitHub.
>
> But you are correct, a quicker and more efficient way would probably
> be to allow users to download the APK from the website. In the long
> term we can still work on getting it on all the stores again.
>
> -J
>
>
> Am Mi., 29. Mai 2019 um 04:55 Uhr schrieb 申远 <shenyuancs@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Sorry for misspelling, let me correct it.
> >
> > The sentence
> >
> > > One of the reason that Weex used to publish Android Playground in the
> name
> > > of Taobao (China) Software is that Taobao already developer accounts
> almost
> > > for each of the twenty Android App market.
> >
> >
> > should change to
> >
> > One of the reason that Weex used to publish Android Playground in the
> name
> > of Taobao (China) Software is that Taobao already registered accounts for
> > most of the twenty Android App market.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > YorkShen
> >
> > 申远
> >
> >
> > 申远 <shenyuancs@gmail.com> 于2019年5月29日周三 上午10:49写道:
> >
> > > Before I was going to bring this to general@incubator, I got a
> response
> > > from INFRA[1], according to which there is an Apple Developer Account
> under
> > > ASF.
> > >
> > > The iOS parts seems to be solved as long as we separate weex_sdk and
> Weex
> > > playground then import fastline [2] in Weex Playground.
> > >
> > > But I am not sure about the Android part, though I am an Android
> > > developer. Let me explain situation here. There are at least twenty
> Android
> > > App Market including Google Play in China. Android developers have to
> > > register developer account for each market in order to cover as many
> users
> > > as possible. One of the reason that Weex used to publish Android
> Playground
> > > in the name of Taobao (China) Software is that Taobao already developer
> > > accounts almost for each of the twenty Android App market. With the
> help of
> > > developer accounts and other infrastructure of Taobao (China) Software,
> > > things were pretty easy as we just needed to click a button to publish
> > > Android App.
> > >
> > > I don't know the detail of fastlane, but according to the doc[3], it
> just
> > > supports Google Play, which is inaccessible for most Chinese
> developers.
> > > And I am not a big fan of registering over 20 android market account,
> it
> > > seems like that we need to remove Android Weex Playground from all
> market
> > > and host it somewhere in our official website. But when users installs
> > > Android Weex Playground from our website, the system may warn users
> that
> > > "weex playground is developer by third party and may contain
> vulnerable".
> > > Anyway, not a perfect solution, but acceptable for me.
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18494
> > > [2] https://github.com/fastlane/fastlane
> > > [3]
> > >
> https://docs.fastlane.tools/getting-started/android/setup/#collect-your-google-credentials
> > >
> > > Best Regards,
> > > YorkShen
> > >
> > > 申远
> > >
> > >
> > > Jan Piotrowski <piotrowski@gmail.com> 于2019年5月28日周二 下午4:07写道:
> > >
> > >> Why does this require a enterprise development account? If the app it
> > >> to be placed in the App Stores, a normal personal account should be
> > >> enough.
> > >>
> > >> > As for Android, it's more complicated in China as we need to apply
> tens
> > >> of Chinese Android distribution channel plus Google Play.
> > >>
> > >> I am also a contributor to https://github.com/fastlane/fastlane, a
> > >> tool that can be used to automate the build and deployment of iOS and
> > >> Android apps. If playground is split to its own repository, it would
> > >> be an interesting project to automate that process. I would volunteer
> > >> to set that up (or at least get it started, until I hit the barrier
> > >> that I don't know Chinese - then I would gladly collaborate with a
> > >> native Chinese speaker).
> > >>
> > >> I agree with the rest YorkShen wrote, so lets see if ASF has any
> > >> suggestion regarding the App Store accounts.
> > >>
> > >> -J
> > >>
> > >> Am Di., 28. Mai 2019 um 09:01 Uhr schrieb 申远 <shenyuancs@gmail.com>:
> > >> >
> > >> > The publishing of Weex Playground is hold as soon as we learned it
> may
> > >> > violate ASF policy here.
> > >> >
> > >> > Maybe we should find a way to let the PMC member to provide the
> > >> convenience
> > >> > > binary.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > The tricky thing here is that we need an Apple/Google enterprise
> > >> > development account under a company's or individual's name. And the
> > >> Apple
> > >> > account would cost us 299 USD per year. As for Android, it's more
> > >> > complicated in China as we need to apply tens of Chinese Android
> > >> > distribution channel plus Google Play.
> > >> >
> > >> > Maybe we should remove Weex Playground from Apple Store and Google
> Play,
> > >> > and host Weex Playground(Binary) only in our website? I think we'd
> > >> better
> > >> > not do any release nor separate repos of Weex Playground until we
> get
> > >> > response from general@incubator
> > >> >
> > >> > Best Regards,
> > >> > YorkShen
> > >> >
> > >> > 申远
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Willem Jiang <willem.jiang@gmail.com> 于2019年5月28日周二
上午11:31写道:
> > >> >
> > >> > > On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 8:04 PM 申远 <shenyuancs@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I agree with that.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Moving playground to another separate repository(also under
> ASF?)
> > >> may
> > >> > > take
> > >> > > > couple of days, I don't think there will be big technical
issue.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > But this doesn't solve the issue that Weex Playground is
under
> Apple
> > >> > > > Developer Enterprise Program Account of Taobao (China)
> Software. And
> > >> > > there
> > >> > > > is a similar situation for Weex Android Playground.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > So, it looks like Taobao publish the binary release of Weex
> > >> Playground.
> > >> > > I'm not sure if it is OK for Apache.
> > >> > > Maybe we should find a way to let the PMC member to provide the
> > >> > > convenience binary.
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > I could and would mark thing "Stuff that some third party
> provides
> > >> for
> > >> > > > Apache Weex", but for "Stuff for Weex the Apache Weex team
also
> > >> > > provides",
> > >> > > > this is really confusing concept.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Best Regards,
> > >> > > > YorkShen
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > 申远
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Jan Piotrowski <piotrowski@gmail.com> 于2019年5月27日周一
下午4:32写道:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > Thanks for the clarification. I understand why the
Playground
> app
> > >> is
> > >> > > > > valuable and awesome for developers.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Would it be an option to move the playground and connected
> code
> > >> (e.g.
> > >> > > > > for http://dotwe.org/vue) to a separate repository?
Or does
> the
> > >> > > > > `playground` code benefit so much from being in the
same
> > >> repository?
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > For me right now this is one of these cases, where
it is
> totally
> > >> > > > > unclear what actually is part of "Apache Weex" (vs.
"Stuff for
> > >> Weex
> > >> > > > > the Apache Weex team also provides" vs. "Stuff that
some third
> > >> party
> > >> > > > > provides for Apache Weex").
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > -J
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Am Mo., 27. Mai 2019 um 09:01 Uhr schrieb 申远 <
> > >> shenyuancs@gmail.com>:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Let me rephrase myself.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >    - The code of Android or iOS playground app
is never
> part of
> > >> > > Apache
> > >> > > > > >    Release. The release scripts always delete
code of the
> > >> Playground
> > >> > > App
> > >> > > > > >    before publishing release candidate.
> > >> > > > > >    - The code of playground and weex_sdk is loosely
coupled
> and
> > >> the
> > >> > > > > >    playground is mainly for demo purpose, like
Google Sample
> > >> [1]. It
> > >> > > > > should
> > >> > > > > >    *never* go into real product environment.
> > >> > > > > >    - But the playground does provide developers
the
> convenience
> > >> of
> > >> > > > > >    verifying the API or feature of Weex. They
just need
> write
> > >> code
> > >> > > > > snippet
> > >> > > > > >    online [2], and scan the QR code, then they
get what they
> > >> write.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > [1] https://github.com/googlesamples
> > >> > > > > > [2] http://dotwe.org/vue
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Best Regards,
> > >> > > > > > YorkShen
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > 申远
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Jan Piotrowski <piotrowski@gmail.com> 于2019年5月24日周五
> 下午8:14写道:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > A compiled Android or iOS native app is actually
an
> > >> interesting
> > >> > > case.
> > >> > > > > > > Is this actually part of the release, or
is just the
> source
> > >> code of
> > >> > > > > > > the app?
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > How tightly coupled are weex and the playground
app
> anyway?
> > >> Right
> > >> > > now
> > >> > > > > > > the playground app seems to live in a `playground`
> subfolder
> > >> of
> > >> > > `ios`
> > >> > > > > > > and `android`. Would it maybe make sense
to split that
> off in
> > >> its
> > >> > > own
> > >> > > > > > > repo and have its own releases? I don't expect
actual
> users of
> > >> > > weex to
> > >> > > > > > > really need the `playground` code, or do
they?
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > But yes, it would definitely be better to
have this app
> not be
> > >> > > > > > > published via a different commercial entity
- no matter
> if you
> > >> > > define
> > >> > > > > > > the binary app to be part of the release
or not. If Apache
> > >> itself
> > >> > > has
> > >> > > > > > > a App Store Connect account I don't know
though - best
> start
> > >> by
> > >> > > asking
> > >> > > > > > > INFRA via a ticket. (Maybe it could also
be published via
> one
> > >> of
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > > > > committers personal account as a fallback)
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > -J
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > -J
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Am Fr., 24. Mai 2019 um 12:20 Uhr schrieb
申远 <
> > >> shenyuancs@gmail.com
> > >> > > >:
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Dear Community
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Weex 0.24.0 is released now, one can
download source or
> > >> > > convenience
> > >> > > > > > > binary
> > >> > > > > > > > through the link in our website [1].
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > And there is a remaining issue for the
release. One may
> > >> notice
> > >> > > that
> > >> > > > > there
> > >> > > > > > > > exists a showcase app called Weex Playground[2],
which
> is
> > >> > > compiled
> > >> > > > > > > > from incubator-weex, but it is not a
part os Apache
> Release
> > >> as
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > > > > release
> > >> > > > > > > > script deleted the files of Playground
when publishing
> > >> release
> > >> > > > > candidate.
> > >> > > > > > > > As one need a enterprise certificates
to publish an iOS
> > >> App, we
> > >> > > used
> > >> > > > > to
> > >> > > > > > > > borrow the certificates from Taobao(China),
LTD.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Based on the fact above, I have following
concerns:
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > >    1. I'd like to know whether it is
ok to exclude some
> file
> > >> > > during
> > >> > > > > > > apache
> > >> > > > > > > >    release, like the code for Weex playground
> > >> > > > > > > >    2. I am not sure whether it is suitable
that I
> continue
> > >> > > borrow the
> > >> > > > > > > >    enterprise certificates from Taobao(China),
LTD and
> > >> publish
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > > iOS
> > >> > > > > > > App. If
> > >> > > > > > > >    it is not acceptable, is there any
iOS enterprise
> > >> certificates
> > >> > > > > under
> > >> > > > > > > ASF?
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > [1]
> > >> > > https://weex.apache.org/download/download.html#latest-release
> > >> > > > > > > > [2]
> > >> https://itunes.apple.com/cn/app/weex-playground/id1130862662
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Best Regards,
> > >> > > > > > > > YorkShen
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > 申远
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > >
> > >>
> > >
>

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