Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-20435-apmail-cordova-dev-archive=cordova.apache.org@cordova.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-cordova-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-cordova-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7D34CE721
	for <apmail-cordova-dev-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:25:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 47674 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jan 2013 16:25:55 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-cordova-dev-archive@cordova.apache.org
Received: (qmail 47142 invoked by uid 500); 30 Jan 2013 16:25:55 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cordova.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@cordova.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@cordova.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@cordova.apache.org>
List-Id: <dev.cordova.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cordova.apache.org
Received: (qmail 46976 invoked by uid 99); 30 Jan 2013 16:25:52 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:25:52 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=5.0
	tests=FRT_ADOBE2,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of gibson.becky@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.215.42] (HELO mail-la0-f42.google.com) (209.85.215.42)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:25:46 +0000
Received: by mail-la0-f42.google.com with SMTP id fe20so1260703lab.29
        for <dev@cordova.apache.org>; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:25:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id
         :subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=vOkrotNrQh00hElm9jgShD6ZUnvpiNlx4ul4+6+Dg8I=;
        b=BSjXDPpd+MJ1Fifc9DVSxT2BiYBzP5U6Gi+xPkDMiXIfU/jRzviUDM+Pmp4g00bWiR
         MjFWufR7oMvbacLuqrLmuyfiGlJXA/p+t+JE2FmaIsmQ8Oic41gIdkt1uzoBD7qoSN/b
         yzjGGm3xDIqAJx0n0Y+w51RaWET5UVIxXF0EWRHOJGaQqPp2BBvHIYFlSJKbaJYkvsOE
         YdZQw/KkuAiigQgRYyhkJuDrgl04EI2w0nRgH/41jWMnz+n6qYCG9+6vei2qkFPNTMgC
         6FaMV+zBvK70C7hQHnxhQVUJ25au9zSpMr1M1tmLANBYrfJEufUPuqgPJKgdlBYZm82U
         +bww==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.144.71 with SMTP id sk7mr5085805lab.29.1359563125227;
 Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:25:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.59.134 with HTTP; Wed, 30 Jan 2013 08:25:25 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CABiQX1XOXZfcavM1CRhCDJgJ1fXdrOoxJnZkfwJ_tLDqWnN5Gg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CD2D628E.16AEB%fil@adobe.com>
	<BFD37BBF-2DAE-4BC1-8E31-4FBCCCA61EA6@me.com>
	<CADjNb+=bA_caH51fCaCft+EQ+og7ixcVs6RWOumr=0uF03cAGA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABiQX1UJMMyG6Dbaxt+eo_rzmcEwXwA8NwxT54XtWwNUbV7_BQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADVgkyMiV=cXLqptTDa3nwhHRypSJdhCDORx6CDNSK+zHrDA7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABiQX1XHqOWjG+z5-9u2L-y1TSTGbeXiuuWCy5Fs=-yG6Hzu6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAE6O_-bN1PMrQFvFQx3W29E+A8rDpXG+OxDkpu-y76snNMAHzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<5B23B58A-EA30-42C3-8003-5CA4A9358491@me.com>
	<CABiQX1XOXZfcavM1CRhCDJgJ1fXdrOoxJnZkfwJ_tLDqWnN5Gg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 11:25:25 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CADjNb+kj_T2mFTzeqxsR5DUd_31RQ4UevSH5-p6SmzdYGY0w8w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: ship 2.4 monday
From: Becky Gibson <gibson.becky@gmail.com>
To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8f2347052100a004d483f52c
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

--e89a8f2347052100a004d483f52c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Thanks, Andrew.

I'm still having problems with the FileTransfer mobile spec tests.   Based
on what I see in the fileTransfer.tests.js file, I set my whitelist to the
following in config.xml:

<access origin="http://www.google.com" />

    <access origin="http://www.apache.org" subdomains="false"/>

    <access origin="https://www.apache.org" />

    <access origin="http://cordova-filetransfer.jitsu.com" />

    <access origin="http://whatheaders.com" />

The goole reference is for the inAppBrowser tests.

With this whitelist I get two failures both relating to unknown host
testing:

File Transfer download method should handle unknown host - the uploadWin
success method is being called when it should not be.  This is trying to
download from "http://foobar.apache.org/index.html"; which should be
rejected because of the subdomains="false" in the apache.org white list
settings.

I also get File Transfer upload method should handle unknown host error as
well with the same error that 'uploadWin' should not have been called.
 Interestingly the whitelist error is caught but is returned in the success
callback as the response.

Now, if I remove the change to fix CB-2235 (
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-ios.git;a=commit;h=db22768362823bf6f84cbaead6c03dd1764f60b2)
 all of the FileTransfer tests pass.


FWIW if I leave the whitelist wide open, I still get the FileTransfer
download method should handle unknown host error that uploadWin is getting
called - which probably makes sense since the subdomain to apache is
allowed.   However, I do not get the upload method should handle unknown
host error which I think I should get!!

Thus,

1) either my whitelist is incorrect

2) the fix is incorrect

3) the tests are incorrect

4) I am totally lost!  (reading jasmine tests is not one of my strong suits)

I am not an http headers guru so it will take me awhile to fully grok the
file transfer code to determine the problem.

-becky


On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>wrote:

> Okay, tagged JS, iOS, Android.
>
> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6648754/cordova-2.4.0rc2/cordova-2.4.0rc2-src.zip
>
> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6648754/cordova-2.4.0rc2/cordova-2.4.0rc2/cordova-js.zip
>
> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6648754/cordova-2.4.0rc2/cordova-2.4.0rc2/cordova-ios.zip
>
> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/6648754/cordova-2.4.0rc2/cordova-2.4.0rc2/cordova-android.zip
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:35 PM, fabian boulegue <fboulegue@me.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Agree
> >
> > _____________________
> > Fabian Boulegue
> > tea inc.
> > CEO - Founder
> > Meierbrede 9
> > 33100 Paderborn
> >
> > Mobile
> >
> > Am 29.01.2013 um 23:43 schrieb Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Ah I get it now (Andrew's list of significant iOS commits) I suppose we
> > > could internally tag an rc2 (not public release) and test the heck out
> of
> > > it. Those iOS changes are critical bug fixes since rc1.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Okay, that wasn't entirely clear...
> > >>
> > >> I think we'd get pretty far by just tagging & testing iOS & Android,
> > since
> > >> most of the changes since rc1 relate to those two platforms. Agree?
> > >>
> > >> Given that we don't test before cutting an rc1, I think we should
> > generally
> > >> expect that we'll need to do an rc2 before shipping a release.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Andrew: sounds great.
> > >>>
> > >>> I'll talk to Shaz about doing a thoruough review of those
> > >>> commits/changes. Lets stay on course for 2.4 Monday.
> > >>>
> > >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnP5iDKwuwk
> > >>>
> > >>> (Hopefully with a better outcome.---^)
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
> >
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>> I can tag JS & iOS & Android @ rc2 today.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Becky Gibson <
> gibson.becky@gmail.com
> > >>>> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> would be nice if we could tag a cordova-js so we are all working
> off
> > >> the
> > >>>>> same version
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:29 PM, fabian boulegue <fboulegue@me.com
> >
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Even if its no change on official repo maybe we should test it in
> a
> > >>> small
> > >>>>>> group...?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> _____________________
> > >>>>>> Fabian Boulegue
> > >>>>>> tea inc.
> > >>>>>> CEO - Founder
> > >>>>>> Meierbrede 9
> > >>>>>> 33100 Paderborn
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Mobile
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Am 29.01.2013 um 20:27 schrieb Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>:
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> The reason we aimed for Monday is because we have various
> > >>> committers in
> > >>>>>>> transit atm and tagging is difficult today + tomorrow.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> On 1/29/13 11:20 AM, "Steven Gill" <stevengill97@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> Could we just tag iOS rc2 today and still aim to release 2.4.0
> on
> > >>>>>> Monday?
> > >>>>>>>> People interested in testing could just work off the source.
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> -Steve
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Andrew Grieve
> > >>>>>>>> <agrieve@chromium.org>wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> Changes of note:
> > >>>>>>>>> [CB-2235] Fixed file transfer whitelisting for iOS6.
> > >>>>>>>>> [CB-2290] iOS: 'CDVJSON.h' file not found when adding a plugin
> > >>>>>>>>> Fixed InAppBrowser becoming subject to the opener's whitelist
> > >>>>>>>>> Fixed InAppBrowser not working on iOS5
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Android, I don't see any changes since the tag that warrant
> > >> an
> > >>>>> rc2.
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> I'll defer to Andrew's opinion as he has been hands-on with
> the
> > >>> iOS
> > >>>>>>>>> repo
> > >>>>>>>>>> recently (at least more than I have).
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>> On 1/29/13 10:52 AM, "fabian boulegue" <fboulegue@me.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Well If we could commit a r2 soon I could let it been tested
> > >>> here,
> > >>>>>>>>> about
> > >>>>>>>>>>> the known issues.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> So we would stay on time.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> _____________________
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Fabian Boulegue
> > >>>>>>>>>>> tea inc.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> CEO - Founder
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Meierbrede 9
> > >>>>>>>>>>> 33100 Paderborn
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Mobile
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Am 29.01.2013 um 19:45 schrieb Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm uncertain and worried that we'd slip to mid-Feb before
> > >>>>>>>>> releasing
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> 2.4.0.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/29/13 10:38 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <agrieve@chromium.org>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> There have been several fixes to iOS since rc1. I think
> this
> > >>>>> would
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> warrant
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> an rc2.
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com
> >
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> We will go straight from 2.4.0rc1 to 2.4.0, unless
> > >>> contributors
> > >>>>>>>>> and
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> committers think there are some unresolved issues left
> over
> > >>>>>>>>> from, or
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> new
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ones introduced in, 2.4.0rc1 .
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/29/13 9:39 AM, "fabian boulegue" <fboulegue@me.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So any update on release for r2?
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Am Jan 29, 2013 um 6:24 PM schrieb Giorgio Natili
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <g.natili@gnstudio.com
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 1/28/13 8:11 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <b@brian.io> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> remember: silence is assent!
> > >>
> >
>

--e89a8f2347052100a004d483f52c--