Re: Discuss: Branching Strategy and SCM

On 8/13/12 10:36 PM, "Omar Gonzalez" wrote: >> >> Also the vote added this to the above options - "The release manager can >> choose to branch from an older revision and cherry-pick or branch from the >> head and remove/block certain revisions." Which I have concerns about as >> it's not quit

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

4. (non-binding), because it is what I know and what I know to work. I'm all for trying something 'new' once the project is (much) further along and the support for it is firmly in place. For now I'd really like to focus on moving the SDK forward, and not spend a whole lot of time and energy on ar

Re: Discuss: Branching Strategy and SCM

> > Also the vote added this to the above options - "The release manager can > choose to branch from an older revision and cherry-pick or branch from the > head and remove/block certain revisions." Which I have concerns about as > it's not quite how I saw the process as described in the URL. > > Th

Re: Discuss: Branching Strategy and SCM

Hi, > That would be the 3rd options: > 7. Git Branching Model (see Description 3) on SVN > 8. Git Branching Model on SVN now and then on Git (see Note 1) > 9. Git Branching Model on Git now (see Note 2) I know my view is different to some others on the list but this is basically my reasoning re

Re: Discuss: Branching Strategy and SCM

> About the only way it can be done without cherry picking is the one > branch/change (but that wasn't put forward as an option) That would be the 3rd options: 7. Git Branching Model (see Description 3) on SVN 8. Git Branching Model on SVN now and then on Git (see Note 1) 9. Git Branching Model o

Re: Discuss: Branching Strategy and SCM

Hi, > Doesn't option 4 exacerbate this problem? How can this be a reason to vote > 'for' option 4? Also you can branch as needed with option 4. Thanks, Justin

Re: Discuss: Branching Strategy and SCM

Hi, > The way I see it, if there are a bunch of developers working in trunk, and > they happen to leave things unfinished or unstable, then somebody has to go > through all of that and figure out what is actually ready for a release and > what is not. I see that as a concern but I think it's a con

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On 8/13/12 5:23 PM, "Om" wrote: > > Are you saying that we should go with SVN while at the same time adopting a > branching strategy like the git branching model? I am not sure SVN can > handle that. > > Om Actually, I voted for #2 which is to use a simpler 3-tier model on SVN until Git com

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

2. (Binding) On 8/13/2012 4:19 PM, Alex Harui wrote: Hi, It is time to make a decision on branching and source control vendors. This vote will end at 2pm PDT Wednesday, August 15. Please vote for one of the following. 1. 3-Tier Branching Model (see Description 1) on SVN 2. 3-Tier Branching

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On 8/13/2012 8:23 PM, Om wrote: On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Alex Harui wrote: SVN doesn't allow you to have more than one branch in your whiteboard? (This is probably tangential to the current discussion) As I understand, in the whiteboard, there is one single folder for each committer.

Re: Discuss: Branching Strategy and SCM

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 8:25 PM, Om wrote: > On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Justin Mclean >wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > - Unsure how it is decided what from develop/trunk goes into a release. > > IMO this will make releases a lot more work for the release manager and > > less likely someone will w

Discuss: Branching Strategy and SCM

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > Hi, > > - Unsure how it is decided what from develop/trunk goes into a release. > IMO this will make releases a lot more work for the release manager and > less likely someone will want to take on that role. > Doesn't option 4 exacerbate thi

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

* I think we as a community need to figure out how to work together in > a more centralized environment before we get too decentralized. I > worry that the desire to move to git is in many ways a desire to "get > around" the problem of not being able to define a branching strategy > by adopting one

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > Hi, > > It is time to make a decision on branching and source control vendors. This > vote will end at 2pm PDT Wednesday, August 15. Please vote for one of the > following. > > 1. 3-Tier Branching Model (see Description 1) on SVN > 2. 3-Tier B

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

Vote is the better political agreement between parts. After 2 years we will look back into this thread and We will considering change Flex Git project. other than SDK. Come on, people, just Vote and take yours comments on old thread for it. I'm with Carol, I will not support Git right now, unle

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

Hi, I think it's a little early to be taking a vote when there no clear consensus and some of the details of the branching models are a little unclear, but as a vote has been called for: +1 (binding) for option 4 My reasons include: - The apache git set up is still experimental. I'd be fine t

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Gordon Smith wrote: > How does Git make merges better than in SVN? > > - Gordon > > In SVN when you make a branch you can essentially move it to any folder when you choose a location. The /branches folder is the typical target by convention, but you can place it a

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > > > > On 8/13/12 4:08 PM, "Om" wrote: > > > > A committer is free to decide what is unstable and what is complete. > Fast > > branching gives us the flexibility of sharing unstable features with > > others, while keeping develop and master as

RE: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

How does Git make merges better than in SVN? - Gordon -Original Message- From: Omar Gonzalez [mailto:omarg.develo...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 5:12 PM To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM > SVN doesn't allow you to

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On 8/13/12 6 :20PM, "Carlos Rovira" wrote: >Hi Carol, > >historically things change when people take the time and effort to make >things happen. If we, in this apache flex project, wants GIT, mentors and >the ASF will make it happen. Infra will get full git support before, if we >are another gr

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

> SVN doesn't allow you to have more than one branch in your whiteboard? > Most > of these arguments still seem to be about fear of merge-hell in SVN. Which > is valid, but the logic about when to branch/merge seems to apply to both. > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > htt

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

> > > In the 3-Tier scheme how many buildbots and test rigs are required vs. > the > > work in trunk method? > One CI server for trunk and one for "develop". In either scheme if you cut > a branch I guess you have to add buildbots for them as well? > > > > Don't know why we would need more than on

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

One thing I like about SVN is that it discourages branching to necessary > times while git encourages branching for a whim. > > These are my opinions, it is the project's choice. > > Regards, > Dave > > SVN discourages branching because branching inherently sucks in SVN. Git encourage branching be

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > On Aug 13, 2012, at 1:43 PM, Omar Gonzalez wrote: > > > On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Dave Fisher > wrote: > > > >> My opinion/vote is (4) - no guts, no glory - work in trunk and learn to > >> co-operate. > >> > >> The vote is more about

Re: Getting Mustella to work.

On 8/13/12 6 :02PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: >So, the Mustella test media is now checked in an compiles for Peter and >I. As was previously agreed, many tests would be broken and the >community would help repair them. Please join in the fun. You¹ll learn >about how it works and we¹ll learn what e

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On 8/13/12 4:08 PM, "Om" wrote: > A committer is free to decide what is unstable and what is complete. Fast > branching gives us the flexibility of sharing unstable features with > others, while keeping develop and master as stable as possible. The > current 'whiteboard' concept is not a re

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

> > OK, but even modifications can be done without branching, right? The key > is > not to check things into "develop" that breaks things. > > Other than Git handles branching better, the technical/logistical reasons > for branching are the same in all SCMs, correct? > > Alex, that's ok, and is up

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On 8/13/12 4:04 PM, "Carlos Rovira" wrote: > Right! for that reason I said the new planed cases was something never came > to flex before because all work was mainly "additive". > > If you plan to make a new component...you can make it in develop, because > it will not break nothing! since is

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

> Normaly, if you are working in a set of spark charts, your work will spawn > > over some weeks. So if you work directly on develop, you should not > commit > > your work to SVN until is done because you will make "develop" unstable > > until you close the feature. > Interesting, that's a differe

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

Right! for that reason I said the new planed cases was something never came to flex before because all work was mainly "additive". If you plan to make a new component...you can make it in develop, because it will not break nothing! since is new and nobody is using it. Now thing in change UICompon

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On 8/13/12 3:45 PM, "Carlos Rovira" wrote: > Hi Alex, > > What is that "clarity"? Can you give me an example? If I want to >> contribute a set of Spark Charts, why should I have to cut a branch first? >> Why can't I just check in ChartBase into the "develop" branch, then add in >> Pie, Bar,

Re: Getting Mustella to work.

I'll start at the top and work on the apollo (aka AIR) tests. -peter On 8/13/12 6:02 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: >So, the Mustella test media is now checked in an compiles for Peter and >I. As was previously agreed, many tests would be broken and the >community would help repair them. Please join

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

If you want to support GIt, please vote in the sbiling thread! vote is open now! :) 2012/8/14 jude > I'm comfortable with SVN too but support the move to Git / GitHub because > it is an environment that makes work like this much more efficient. People > can easily fork the project, make a change

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > > > > On 8/13/12 3:24 PM, "Carlos Rovira" wrote: > > > 2012/8/14 Dave Fisher > > > >> One thing I like about SVN is that it discourages branching to necessary > >> times while git encourages branching for a whim. > >> > > > > SVN discourages

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

Hi Alex, What is that "clarity"? Can you give me an example? If I want to > contribute a set of Spark Charts, why should I have to cut a branch first? > Why can't I just check in ChartBase into the "develop" branch, then add in > Pie, Bar, etc over time in subsequent check ins as I finish them u

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On 8/13/12 3:15 PM, "Dave Fisher" wrote: > > On Aug 13, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > >> >> >>> >>> Really what is the worst that can happen if someone plays in trunk and makes >>> a >>> mistake? >>> >>> Regards, >>> Dave >>> >> For me, I don't like the psychology of reverting s

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

I'm comfortable with SVN too but support the move to Git / GitHub because it is an environment that makes work like this much more efficient. People can easily fork the project, make a change and get it to a working state. Then the main branch can easily patch those changes back in. It is also an a

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On 8/13/12 3:24 PM, "Carlos Rovira" wrote: > 2012/8/14 Dave Fisher > >> One thing I like about SVN is that it discourages branching to necessary >> times while git encourages branching for a whim. >> > > SVN discourages branching because is not a core part in the design of the > system, wh

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

I propose we should try to continue discussion in the other thread and let this only for voting, or it could grow too much and be complicated to follow for people counting votes -- > Carlos Rovira > Director de Tecnología > M: +34 607 22 60 05 > F: +34 912 35 57 77 >

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

2012/8/14 Dave Fisher > One thing I like about SVN is that it discourages branching to necessary > times while git encourages branching for a whim. > SVN discourages branching because is not a core part in the design of the system, while in Git is a core part. In SVN you try to not branch becau

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

Hi Carol, historically things change when people take the time and effort to make things happen. If we, in this apache flex project, wants GIT, mentors and the ASF will make it happen. Infra will get full git support before, if we are another grain of sand wanting that support. But again, I'm def

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On Aug 13, 2012, at 2:52 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > > >> >> Really what is the worst that can happen if someone plays in trunk and makes >> a >> mistake? >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> > For me, I don't like the psychology of reverting someone's changes, or even > my own. It feels like going backw

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On Aug 13, 2012, at 2:59 PM, Carol Frampton wrote: > Dave, > > I'd like to vote with you but I am still pondering the situation. In your > scenerio where would you work on something like a rewrite or a new major > piece of functionality that might only be half done at release time. Branch or

Getting Mustella to work.

So, the Mustella test media is now checked in an compiles for Peter and I. As was previously agreed, many tests would be broken and the community would help repair them. Please join in the fun. You’ll learn about how it works and we’ll learn what else needs to be documented or fixed. I think

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

Dave, I'd like to vote with you but I am still pondering the situation. In your scenerio where would you work on something like a rewrite or a new major piece of functionality that might only be half done at release time. I am totally opposed to using source control not yet totally supported b

Re: Instructions for building mustella

Hi, I have completely missed this entire thread about mustella. I will gather the info here and post something on the wiki. I think a README in the mustella directory is a good idea. My experience with running mustella in a clean install has been: a. svn co the Apache Flex trunk b. following the

Re: [DISCUSS] Navigators

Thanks Carol On 13 Aug 2012, at 22:38, Carol Frampton wrote: > Whiteboard/cframpton/adobe.next > > Sent from my Motorola ATRIX™ 4G on AT&T

Re: [DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

> > Really what is the worst that can happen if someone plays in trunk and makes a > mistake? > > Regards, > Dave > For me, I don't like the psychology of reverting someone's changes, or even my own. It feels like going backward. If the only public copy of some work goes in trunk and then ge

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

9. Git Branching Model on Git now (see Note 2) +1 (binding)

[DISCUSS] Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On Aug 13, 2012, at 1:43 PM, Omar Gonzalez wrote: > On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > >> My opinion/vote is (4) - no guts, no glory - work in trunk and learn to >> co-operate. >> >> The vote is more about the Classic model than it is about Git vs. SVN. >> >> To me svn tag

Re: [DISCUSS] Navigators (was [ROADMAP] Apache Flex Steering Survey - Revised component status)

Whiteboard/cframpton/adobe.next Sent from my Motorola ATRIX™ 4G on AT&T -Original message- From: Tink To: "flex-dev@incubator.apache.org" Sent: Mon, Aug 13, 2012 21:04:02 GMT+00:00 Subject: [DISCUSS] Navigators (was [ROADMAP] Apache Flex Steering Survey - Revised component status) He

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

#9 for me. This seems more fluid and adaptable to unforeseen situations where multiple concurrent branches may be needed, some short-term, some quite long-term. Plus, having a known release branch should make it easier for newcomers to understand and for anyone to immediately know where the stable

[DISCUSS] Navigators (was [ROADMAP] Apache Flex Steering Survey - Revised component status)

Hey Alex Have the navigators been committed to a whiteboard anywhere? I like to open up some discussion about navigators, but thought I'd wait for these to be committed first. cheers Tink On 3 Aug 2012, at 17:09, Alex Harui wrote: >>4.6 ViewStack (listed in Flex White Paper - protoype)

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > My opinion/vote is (4) - no guts, no glory - work in trunk and learn to > co-operate. > > The vote is more about the Classic model than it is about Git vs. SVN. > > To me svn tag == git branch. > > Regards, > Dave People that use Git a lot

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

2. (Binding) Igor Costa www.igorcosta.com www.igorcosta.org On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:39 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > My opinion/vote is (4) - no guts, no glory - work in trunk and learn to > co-operate. > > The vote is more about the Classic model than it is about Git

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

My opinion/vote is (4) - no guts, no glory - work in trunk and learn to co-operate. The vote is more about the Classic model than it is about Git vs. SVN. To me svn tag == git branch. Regards, Dave On Aug 13, 2012, at 1:19 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > Hi, > > It is time to make a decision on bra

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

2. (Binding) On 8/13/12 1:19 PM, "Alex Harui" wrote: > Hi, > > It is time to make a decision on branching and source control vendors. This > vote will end at 2pm PDT Wednesday, August 15. Please vote for one of the > following. > > 1. 3-Tier Branching Model (see Description 1) on SVN > 2. 3

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

9. Git Branching Model on Git now (see Note 2) +1 non-binding On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Carlos Rovira < carlos.rov...@codeoscopic.com> wrote: > Ops! sorry I want to say 9) > > please not take into account my first mail... > > > > 2012/8/13 Omar Gonzalez > > > 9. Git Branching Model on Gi

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

Ops! sorry I want to say 9) please not take into account my first mail... 2012/8/13 Omar Gonzalez > 9. Git Branching Model on Git now (see Note 2) > > +1 (binding) > -- Carlos Rovira Director de Tecnología M: +34 607 22 60 05 F: +34 912 35 57 77 CODEOSCOPIC S

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

#9 for sure (if my vote counted) On Monday, August 13, 2012 at 4:19 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > Hi, > > It is time to make a decision on branching and source control vendors. This > vote will end at 2pm PDT Wednesday, August 15. Please vote for one of the > following. > > 1. 3-Tier Branching Model

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

9. Git Branching Model on Git now (see Note 2) +1 (binding)

Re: [VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

My non-binding vote goes without doubt for GIT with nvie model: http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ So 8 --> Git Branching Model on SVN now and then on Git Thanks Carlos 2012/8/13 Alex Harui > Hi, > > It is time to make a decision on branching and source control vendors.

[VOTE] Branching Strategy and SCM

Hi, It is time to make a decision on branching and source control vendors. This vote will end at 2pm PDT Wednesday, August 15. Please vote for one of the following. 1. 3-Tier Branching Model (see Description 1) on SVN 2. 3-Tier Branching Model on SVN now and then on Git (see Note 1) 3. 3-Tier B

Re: mustella fails to build still

I'm looking into that (bringing back old memories, with Carol's help). There was some question as to whether or not mustella would be part of the Flex trunk/branch. Is that resolved so making this mod will work (regardless of scripts et al that might make mustella optional during a checkout, its r

Re: mustella fails to build still

On 8/13/12 8:36 AM, "Peter Ent" wrote: > I will try to make some more sense of this and modify the mini_run script > to look at its current location (as mustella is located in the Apache Flex > directory, at least right now), the env.properties, its own > local.properties, and the definition o

[jira] [Commented] (FLEX-33166) We need to be able to call use text input fields in a scrollable container to call up the soft number pad in IOS

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33166?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13433407#comment-13433407 ] Dan Murray commented on FLEX-33166: --- The ability to call up a numerical key pad is a fun

Re: error with ant other.locales error

Hi Carol You're correct. I was working with sources from git://git.apache.org/flex.git respectively https://github.com/apache/flex. Just tried it with the released sources you mentioned.. but I have the same issue. Added a mkdir target in the build.xml to create the en_US directory and it worked

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

Igor, until now (flex < 4.8) I don' t see deep changes in flex core like the ones people want to perform. Spark and other features were always "additive". SVN works well with such projects. But we target now other kind of changes in the core that never was done before in flex. So I would like to

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Igor Costa wrote: > Carlos > > "But the real problem for me is that we can't target the changes we plan > without a tool like Git. Maybe people that does not know Git does not > understand this, but we were not able to make such deep changes if we are > using SVN.

Re: Roadmap

Thanks Scott, I will link the Spoon page to the wiki page. Cheers Igor Costa www.igorcosta.com www.igorcosta.org On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Guthmann, Scott wrote: > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Status+of+Project > > Changed to Status of

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

Carlos "But the real problem for me is that we can't target the changes we plan without a tool like Git. Maybe people that does not know Git does not understand this, but we were not able to make such deep changes if we are using SVN." Flex SDK was built over 4 versions using SVN, Since Flex 3 we

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

IMHO, and taking into account that I'm only a not-binding vote... I don't see real arguments against Git and maybe as Omar says people does not want to figth with yet another SCM... But the real problem for me is that we can't target the changes we plan without a tool like Git. Maybe people that

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Carol Frampton wrote: > A clarification question about Git: > > Would I lose the ability to look at the repro thru the web. I make use of > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/flex/trunk/ etc more often then > I expected. > > Carol > > > > You can browse it

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

A clarification question about Git: Would I lose the ability to look at the repro thru the web. I make use of https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/flex/trunk/ etc more often then I expected. Carol >

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

On 8/13/12 12 :13PM, "Omar Gonzalez" wrote: >On Monday, August 13, 2012, Carol Frampton wrote: > >> >> >> On 8/11/12 2 :30AM, "Alex Harui" > >>wrote: >> >> > >> >Tomorrow I will try to commit something and if it works, we'll start a >> >vote >> >on Monday. >> >> I assume/hope the VOTE would be

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Omar Gonzalez wrote: > ...The way Apache (doesn't) supports Git kind of sucks anyhow, as it > essentially leaves sVN as the primary and uses Git as an interface > basically No. That's only one of the options, please read s.apache.org/flex_git_options -Bertra

Re: [MENTOR] Pushing to Git (was: What would it take to move to Git)

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Alex Harui wrote: > I think folks want to use Git as the main repo. But when I follow the > instructions on [1] it isn't working. "git push" does not run successfully. > > Because it is "experimental", can we open Infra tickets or is this where we > need to supp

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

On Monday, August 13, 2012, Carol Frampton wrote: > > > On 8/11/12 2 :30AM, "Alex Harui" > wrote: > > > > >Tomorrow I will try to commit something and if it works, we'll start a > >vote > >on Monday. > > I assume/hope the VOTE would be at least 48 hours since I now have to drop > everything I was

RE: Roadmap

> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Status+of+Project > Changed to Status of Project Igor - Thank you for posting about the status of the project. Second, the Open Spoon foundation has also been doing some of the community organization work and keeping the stake holders receiving in

Re: Becoming a committer

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Carol Frampton wrote: > > Some time in the not too distant future, before we exit incubation, I have > heard there is the possibility that original committers who have > "disappeared" or maybe never appeared will be removed from the committer > list. I know there

Re: error with ant other.locales error

I've seen this error before but it was fixed. I suspect you aren't working with the released sources so you might want to pull them down from http://www.apache.org/dist/incubator/flex/4.8.0-incubating/. I recommend you read the README and the RELEASE_NOTES. The fix was to create the directory C:

Re: [MENTOR] Pushing to Git (was: What would it take to move to Git)

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > ...I think folks want to use Git as the main repo. But when I follow the > instructions on [1] it isn't working. "git push" does not run successfully... Those instructions won't work for Flex, as it does not have a writable Git repository at

RE: What would it take to move to Git?

> IMHO, I do not accept for Git move right now. > We must continue in SVN this means that projects keep going. Maybe when we > have a solid proper release like 5.0 we should move to git. I have to agree with Igor on this topic. I realize how much fun it is to debate tools and different schools of

Re: Becoming a committer

On 8/13/12 11 :49AM, "Guthmann, Scott" wrote: >> But, you did the right thing by asking your questions so that everyone >>who wants to become a committer can understand the process a bit better >>as well. Thanks for your contributions so far, and I expect nothing >>less from you in the future

Inactive committers (was: Becoming a committer)

Hi, On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Guthmann, Scott wrote: > There are several people who are on the committer list who haven't > commented, > haven't contributed via this mailing list, haven't opened or closed a JIRA > ticket, and > probably haven't done much in several months for the Apa

Re: [MENTOR] Pushing to Git (was: What would it take to move to Git)

On 8/13/12 8:04 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" wrote: > > That's one of the options that I listed at > http://s.apache.org/flex_git_options - the other one is to start using > Git (on an apache.org server) as Flex's main code repository instead > of svn. See my notes at http://s.apache.org/flex_g

RE: Becoming a committer

> But, you did the right thing by asking your questions so that everyone who > wants to become a committer can understand the process a bit better as well. > Thanks for your contributions so far, and I expect nothing less from you in > the future :-) I agree with Om - Erik has been doing a good

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

On 8/11/12 2 :30AM, "Alex Harui" wrote: > >Tomorrow I will try to commit something and if it works, we'll start a >vote >on Monday. I assume/hope the VOTE would be at least 48 hours since I now have to drop everything I was working on to go learn enough about Git to vote. I would also like to

Re: mustella fails to build still

I will try to make some more sense of this and modify the mini_run script to look at its current location (as mustella is located in the Apache Flex directory, at least right now), the env.properties, its own local.properties, and the definition of environment variables. Peter Ent Flex SDK Team Ad

Re: [MENTOR] Pushing to Git (was: What would it take to move to Git)

Hi, On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Alex Harui wrote: > On 8/13/12 1:31 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" wrote: >> ...See http://s.apache.org/flex_git_options... >> > ...I'm not sure how to interpret your response. That link points to your > reply > to Justin, but doesn't mention the wiki at all. D

Re: What would it take to move to Git?

IMHO, I do not accept for Git move right now. We must continue in SVN this means that projects keep going. Maybe when we have a solid proper release like 5.0 we should move to git. Right now is a waste of time trying to procrastinating things that isn't relevant to the project goals. --

Re: Roadmap

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Status+of+Project Changed to Status of Project Regards Igor Costa www.igorcosta.com www.igorcosta.org On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Omar Gonzalez wrote: > On Monday, August 13, 2012, Carol Frampton wrote: > > >

Re: [MENTOR] Pushing to Git (was: What would it take to move to Git)

On 8/13/12 1:31 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" wrote: > On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Alex Harui wrote: >> ...This is the page I was working from: >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ >> >> I'm not sure whether this document or the wiki document takes precedence... > > See http://s.apache.org/fl

Re: Roadmap

On Monday, August 13, 2012, Carol Frampton wrote: > > > On 8/11/12 12 :37PM, "Igor Costa" > > wrote: > > >I've setup a page in wiki to other developers see what's going on with > >committers. > >https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Roadmap > > > >Roadmap is subject of change, any decis

Re: mustella fails to build still

On 8/13/12 12 :29AM, "Alex Harui" wrote: > > > >On 8/12/12 7:26 AM, "Peter Ent" wrote: > >> I was under the impression FLEX_HOME was not necessary to be defined >>(or maybe >> it was ought not need to be defined). I'll update the instructions on >>the >> wiki. >> >Me too, but in digging into

Re: Roadmap

On 8/11/12 12 :37PM, "Igor Costa" wrote: >I've setup a page in wiki to other developers see what's going on with >committers. >https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/FLEX/Roadmap > >Roadmap is subject of change, any decision we make for next release, we >should add on this page. I had the

[jira] [Commented] (FLEX-33149) Create webservice that returns the preferred mirror url given a path to an Apache project release

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-33149?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13433090#comment-13433090 ] Nick Kwiatkowski commented on FLEX-33149: - Steps that we had to follow to get this

Re: [OT] Chrome 21 breaks AIR badge installation: your vote is needed!

I think everybody can just star that chromium issue without any comment. I think the star should be the same as a vote. Greetings Marcus Am 13.08.2012 um 14:00 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz : > On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Erik de Bruin wrote: >> ...In order to raise awareness and get some

Re: [OT] Chrome 21 breaks AIR badge installation: your vote is needed!

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Erik de Bruin wrote: > ...In order to raise awareness and get some attention, could everyone > please visit these reports: [1] (Google) and [2] (Adobe) and leave a > comment/cast a vote... IMO, leaving comments on bug reports just to say "please fix this" is just

Re: InstallApacheFlex - New build

Om, Which version of AIR did you compile this with? I've mentioned it before, but I keep getting the "This application uses a version of Adobe AIR that is out of date." This is both on my work PC and Laptop (both are on AIR 3.2). Updating to AIR 3.3 allowed me to install the app. Additionally,

  1   2   >