royale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>
Subject Re: Repos and Releases
Date Sun, 03 Dec 2017 07:22:18 GMT
I'm going to try to reply to everyone else in this one post...

Today, for folks just wanting to write an app with Royale, the nightly for
"JSOnly" has everything you need to create JS output, but not SWF output.
The nightly for the "FlexJS" package does not (and can never) bundle the
Adobe playerglobal and airglobal needed to generate SWF output.  The
"FlexJS" nightly contains an Ant script to copy in the Adobe bits after
you download them.

And now, I am proposing to change this packaging so that the source zip
will contain 3 folders representing the 3 repos (royals-compiler,
royals-typedefs, royale-asjs) and without more fiddling, the JSOnly binary
artifact will contain what is currently in the "JSOnly" nightly but in a
royale-asjs folder and be otherwise ready to go for Flash Builder and
other IDEs, and the "FlexJS" binary artifact will again require running an
Ant script to position the Adobe bits.

For these IDE users, SWF functionality is essentially something you choose
early when deciding what package to download.  I'm not sure how, under
Apache rules, to create a binary artifact that is an add-in of the
SWF-only bits.  Binary artifacts are supposed to be the results of a
compilation of a source package.  I suppose we could create some sort of
script that overlays the SWF-only bits over a JSOnly binary.

Meanwhile, to answer Carlos's question, I think for Maven users you choose
to get SWF output merely by adding the Adobe airglobal/playerglobal
dependencies to your POM.  These dependencies are in by default for the
examples.  Although it occurs to me that MDLExample shouldn't have them,
so maybe I'll double-check that when I have time tomorrow.

I will have limited time to work on this until tomorrow night.

HTH,
-Alex

On 12/2/17, 1:14 PM, "omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of OmPrakash Muppirala"
<omuppi1@gmail.com on behalf of bigosmallm@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Dec 2, 2017 11:20 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>As an application developer no. You are getting that package [1] and have
>everything what you need to build app to swf an js.
>
>[1]
>https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapacheflex
>build.cloudapp.net%3A8080%2Fjob%2Froyale-&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.co
>m%7Cacd29e28cb594f6788fd08d539c9a8ff%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C
>0%7C0%7C636478460681913302&sdata=84IVbhNcVYNkti7qeE%2B6VeEJ7E8uDM0y9NDychV
>bYvc%3D&reserved=0
>asjs/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/out/
>
>
>That's good to know.  I should be able to use this in the npm package
>right?
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Thanks, Piotr
>
>On Sat, Dec 2, 2017, 19:33 OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosmallm@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> On Dec 2, 2017 9:08 AM, "Piotr Zarzycki" <piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Om,
>>
>> Not sure what do you mean? We have it. You are downloading one zip file
>and
>> using it in IDE.
>>
>>
>>
>> Are we not downloading falcon, gcc etc separately?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Om
>>
>>
>>
>> Piotr
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017, 17:30 OmPrakash Muppirala <bigosmallm@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > With this setup, can we have the binary release package all the
>> > dependencies in one zip file?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Om
>> >
>> > On Dec 2, 2017 8:25 AM, "Harbs" <harbs.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I don’t have much to add. For me, the simpler, the better. The
>> decisions
>> > > should be to get the first release out as quickly as possible and
>>make
>> > our
>> > > release process as easy as it can be so we can release often.
>> > >
>> > > > On Dec 2, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Piotr Zarzycki <
>> piotrzarzycki21@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >  I would also see in the develop Harbs
>> > > > changes with namespaces before release, after your merge.
>> > >
>> > > I’ll try to finish that up tomorrow.
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>

Mime
View raw message