embre 2013 15:20
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex PixelBender Package 1.0 (RC2)
On 12/19/13 3:24 AM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>>I'm proposing that the pixelbender.xml only contains the "main" target
>>as the release
On 12/19/13 3:24 AM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>>I'm proposing that the pixelbender.xml only contains the "main" target
>>as the release policy only seems to require instructions on how to
>>compile the source, not necessarily create a >release. The
>>release-pixelbender target will remain in
kage from dist repo.
This is to be done when window/gpu is not available, eg. when running the build
on Jenkins without a service.
Is that correct ?
Maurice
-Message d'origine-
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Envoyé : jeudi 19 décembre 2013 07:53
À : dev@flex.apache.org
On 12/18/13 3:08 PM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>Sorry Alex, I missed you proposition in the last email (this interleaved
>multithreaded discussions are a real pain...)
>
>> Right now, I'm thinking of:
>> 1) adding a pixelbender.xml file with a main target that does the
>> compile, a clean targ
e
-Message d'origine-
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com] Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013
22:37 À : dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex
PixelBender Package 1.0 (RC2)
On 12/18/13 9:48 AM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>>
&g
Hi,
> Right now, I'm thinking of:
> 1) adding a pixelbender.xml file with a main target that does the compile,
> a clean target that deletes the PBJ and a copy target that copies the PBJs
> into place in the sdk tree.
> 2) add more to the release notes that point you to this xml file
> 3) Separate
13 22:37
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex PixelBender Package 1.0 (RC2)
On 12/18/13 9:48 AM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>>
>>Well, I am making it a separate package. The question is whether you
>>think we should also move this
On 12/18/13 2:12 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> Doing #1 appears to be the least work, but if you are going to veto the
>> release then I need to find some other configuration that will make you
>> happy.
>
>Releases can't be vetoed. They require 3+1's and more +1 than -1's. But
>the PMC
Hi,
> Doing #1 appears to be the least work, but if you are going to veto the
> release then I need to find some other configuration that will make you
> happy.
Releases can't be vetoed. They require 3+1's and more +1 than -1's. But the PMC
does have a responsibility to the board that the releas
On 12/18/13 9:48 AM, "Maurice Amsellem"
wrote:
>>
>>Well, I am making it a separate package. The question is whether you
>>think we should also move this code out of the flex-sdk repo.
>What does "separate package inside the flex-sdk" mean?
>is that a distinct and autonomous directory inside
ise terms ;-)
-Message d'origine-
De : omup...@gmail.com [mailto:omup...@gmail.com] De la part de OmPrakash
Muppirala
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 18:35
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex PixelBender Package 1.0 (RC2)
On Dec 18, 2013 9:07 AM, "
we don't stop until Adobe stops.
Maurice
-Message d'origine-----
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 17:59
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex PixelBender Package 1.0 (RC2)
On 12/18/13 6:59 AM, &quo
so large, and we might just try to
> work from a grammar spec and byte code spec and get Falcon to do it.
>
> We need to think through whether we want to support PB "forever".
I think it is too much effort for a few shaders. IMO, we should compile
the pbk files and keep
trying to get a look at
>the pixel bender compiler source to determine if it is worth donating to
>Apache Flex. If we could get enough stuff to have control of the
>compiler would we write a Linux version and then go back to a single
>package?
>>
>>Maurice
>>
>>
version and then go back to a single package?
That is a possibility, but it's a lot of work.
So given the reasons above, is it worth the effort?
Regards,
Maurice
-Message d'origine-
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 15:37
À : d
yé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 00:48
>À : dev@flex.apache.org
>Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex PixelBender Package 1.0
>(RC2)
>
>
>
>On 12/17/13 3:35 PM, "Maurice Amsellem"
>wrote:
>
>>> The goal was to not move the PBK files out to a diff
package if we find that we can
someday."
is this the point you are talking about ?
Maurice
-Message d'origine-
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 00:48
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex Pixel
On 12/17/13 9:35 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> No, I'm using OSX. What error did you get?
>Unable to copy the README.pb file. Has that actually been checked in?
Hah! That might help. But I think you're trying to running the
release-pixelbender target which I was thinking would be on t
Hi,
> No, I'm using OSX. What error did you get?
Unable to copy the README.pb file. Has that actually been checked in?
Justin
On 12/17/13 5:33 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> The steps to build is in there already (build-pixelbender target).
>Which currently doesn't work (for me anyway). Perhaps it's an OSX issue?
No, I'm using OSX. What error did you get?
-Alex
Hi,
> The steps to build is in there already (build-pixelbender target).
Which currently doesn't work (for me anyway). Perhaps it's an OSX issue?
> Flex-utilities may have more than one thing coming out of it someday.
Sure but each "sub project" has it's own directory so it far easier to know
wh
On 12/17/13 4:36 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> but there is no steps for working from the source kit per-se as you
>>pointed out.
>Which is required for a valid release. Although in this case it's a
>little unusual as it not aimed at users, there not much you can do with a
>pixel bender
Hi,
> but there is no steps for working from the source kit per-se as you pointed
> out.
Which is required for a valid release. Although in this case it's a little
unusual as it not aimed at users, there not much you can do with a pixel bender
release on it own.
> I think we can. The main SDK
On 12/17/13 3:19 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> OK. Good point about the overlay of the notice files. I'll add an ant
>> target to copy just the pbk/pbj.
>That would be required for the CI anyway wouldn't it?
The downloads.xml does the right thing (downloads the -bin.zip, only
copies ou
lasssoftware.com]
>Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 00:19
>À : dev@flex.apache.org
>Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex PixelBender Package 1.0
>(RC2)
>
>Hi,
>
>> OK. Good point about the overlay of the notice files. I'll add an
>> ant target
]
Envoyé : mercredi 18 décembre 2013 00:19
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex PixelBender Package 1.0 (RC2)
Hi,
> OK. Good point about the overlay of the notice files. I'll add an
> ant target to copy just the pbk/pbj.
That would be required for th
Hi,
> OK. Good point about the overlay of the notice files. I'll add an ant
> target to copy just the pbk/pbj.
That would be required for the CI anyway wouldn't it?
> The goal was to not move the PBK files out to a different repo and
> instead, package a subset of the flex-sdk repo.
Can we actu
OK. Good point about the overlay of the notice files. I'll add an ant
target to copy just the pbk/pbj.
The goal was to not move the PBK files out to a different repo and
instead, package a subset of the flex-sdk repo. Do you think everything
on this list is required? IOW:
1) can we tell folks
Hi,
Tested on OSX, there still a few things that need a little work IMO - see below.
- MD5 and sigs all good (even though sig used is not in web of trust)
gpg: Signature made Wed 18 Dec 04:28:17 2013 EST using RSA key ID DA9CCFF2
gpg: Good signature from "Alex Harui (CODE SIGNING KEY) "
gpg: WARN
My new key is in the KEYS file (in the folder above the rc) so you will
need to import it to verify the signature.
On 12/17/13 9:46 AM, "Alex Harui" wrote:
>Please use this thread for discussion.
>
>Thanks,
>-Alex
>
Please use this thread for discussion.
Thanks,
-Alex
rtifact is not valid (no
>PBJ).
>
>Maurice
>
>-Message d'origine-
>De : Alex Harui [mailto:aha...@adobe.com]
>Envoyé : mardi 17 décembre 2013 15:20
>À : dev@flex.apache.org
>Objet : Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex PixelBender Package 1.0
>
>
>
I downloaded the sources and tried to compile the pixel_bender package release,
as stated in the ASF guidelines.
- However, it's not clear from the README how it should be compiled and what
target needs to be called in the build.xml?
( I supposed it's " release-pixelbender" but this should be
: Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex PixelBender Package 1.0
On 12/17/13 3:10 AM, "Tom Chiverton" wrote:
>The README only talks about Apache Flex, I think it should probably be
>rewriten for PixelBender ?
>
>Minor thing though...
I considered that. Let's see if others agree.
-Alex
On 12/17/13 3:10 AM, "Tom Chiverton" wrote:
>The README only talks about Apache Flex, I think it should probably be
>rewriten for PixelBender ?
>
>Minor thing though...
I considered that. Let's see if others agree.
-Alex
I think too late. I copied the revoked key to the MIT server. But I
couldn't figure out how to just revoke the sub key so maybe it will just
be less hassle to start over with a new key :-(
On 12/17/13 2:55 AM, "Tom Chiverton" wrote:
>On 17/12/2013 07:14, Alex Harui wrote:
>> revoke the sub key
The README only talks about Apache Flex, I think it should probably be
rewriten for PixelBender ?
Minor thing though...
Tom
On 17/12/2013 07:14, Alex Harui wrote:
revoke the sub key and ended up revoking both the sub key and primary key.
Might be too late now, but as long as you didn't publish the revoke you
can just restore a previous version of the .gpg folder.
Tom
On 12/16/13 9:56 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> Interesting. I didn't notice that, but yeah, F8Š is a sub key. Do you
>> know the steps I need to take to fix all of this?
>At a guess:
>gpg --default-key C9383D43
Didn't seem to help
>
>
>> How do I update the KEYS file?
>To change you e
Hi,
> Interesting. I didn't notice that, but yeah, F8Š is a sub key. Do you
> know the steps I need to take to fix all of this?
At a guess:
gpg --default-key C9383D43
> How do I update the KEYS file?
To change you email address? I think you can add extra address but not modify
an existing one
On 12/16/13 7:15 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Have the releases been signed with a correct key?
Interesting. I didn't notice that, but yeah, F8Š is a sub key. Do you
know the steps I need to take to fix all of this? I've spent the past
hour trying to figure out what to do. Why did sig
Hi,
Forgot to say that you can verify the signature (using the KEYS file) with and
the MD5 hashes are correct.
For example:
gpg: Signature made Fri 13 Dec 11:55:17 2013 EST using RSA key ID F8502A44
gpg: Good signature from "aharui "
Thanks,
Justin
Hi,
Have the releases been signed with a correct key?
Asking as [1] says this "It is recommended that your Apache email address is
used as the primary User-ID for the code signing key". The artefacts are signed
by aha...@adobe.com key F8502A44 which is obviously not an Apache email
address.
Please use this thread for discussion.
Thanks,
-Alex
44 matches
Mail list logo
