cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Braden Shepherdson <bra...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: tag 2.6.0rc1 soon?
Date Thu, 21 Mar 2013 18:36:05 GMT
Yes, that's on my list of things to do. I'm making progress along that
list, but it's currently outrunning me.

Do people like the idea of putting this doc into the docs.cordova.io docs?
Or do we prefer to keep contributor-related things in the wiki? If the
latter, it can wait, but if the former then I should probably commit it
very soon.

Braden


On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:

> Braden also published this detailed guide for contributors on the topic:
>
>
> https://googledrive.com/host/0B8sLcyOAEX-XUHAxNXhISE5rTTg/guide_contributing_index.md.html
>
> (Which I'm guessing will make its way into our docs proper?)
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
> > Alright folks, mobile-spec and cordova-js are tagged 2.6.0rc1, and the
> > 2.6.x branches on both those repos are now pushed up. Gogo release mode!
> >
> > On 3/21/13 9:12 AM, "James Jong" <wjamesjong@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Nice.  Thanks Michal.
> >>
> >>-James Jong
> >>
> >>On Mar 21, 2013, at 11:57 AM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes, the intent is to have living branches.  We may also cherry-pick
> >>> regressions back to more than just the current release.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:50 AM, James Jong <wjamesjong@gmail.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks Braden.  Is the intent to have 'living' branches for each major
> >>>> release (e.g. 2.6, 3.0) which contain tags for release candidates and
> >>>>minor
> >>>> revisions?  So going forward we would have 2.6.x , 3.0.x, ...
> branches?
> >>>>
> >>>> -James Jong
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mar 21, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Braden Shepherdson <braden@chromium.org
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I meant to send an email about this last night. Here's the
> >>>>>(high-level)
> >>>>> process we'll need to follow for each of the repos.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Step 0: This time only, delete the 'next' branch. We're not using
> them
> >>>>> anymore, and they'll just add confusion.
> >>>>> Step 1: Checkout and pull master.
> >>>>> Step 2: git checkout -b 2.6.x (now you're on the new branch 2.6.x)
> >>>>> Step 3: tag 2.6.0.rc1 (on the 2.6.x branch)
> >>>>> Step 4: Push the branch and tag.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> NB: The branch is for the minor revision (ie. 2.6.x) not the point
> >>>> release
> >>>>> (2.6.0). The branch will have tags called 2.6.0rc1, 2.6.0rc2, etc.
> and
> >>>> then
> >>>>> 2.6.0. Any 2.6.1 that we do will be on this 2.6.x branch as well,
> just
> >>>>> adding more tags.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Remember that commits always land in master first. Regression fixes
> >>>> should
> >>>>> be cherry-picked to 2.6.x after being committed to master.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Braden
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:17 AM, James Jong <wjamesjong@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Is the new release branching process for 2.6 posted somewhere?
 I
> >>>>>>didn't
> >>>>>> see it searching through the emails.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -James Jong
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mar 20, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Braden Shepherdson <
> braden@chromium.org>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> My changes are in.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Alright sounds like we need to wait on those pull reqs.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Braden, if you get it in time, great, otherwise, not
a big deal.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Related: can someone recap the newer release/branching/tagging
> >>>> approach
> >>>>>> we
> >>>>>>>> talked about at the face-to-face (and let's decide if
we want to
> >>>>>>>>use
> >>>> it
> >>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>> not)?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 3/20/13 9:20 AM, "Shazron" <shazron@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'm trying to get CB-52 for FileTransfer upload/download
and the
> >>>>>>>>> keyboardformaccessorybar re-fix in as well - also
seeing if the
> >>>>>>>>> FileTransfer mobile-spec stuff works to test. Was
planning on
> >>>>>>>>>pulling
> >>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>> the iOS pull requests but may not have time, but
it seems Andrew
> >>>>>>>>>is
> >>>> on
> >>>>>> it
> >>>>>>>>> already :)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:50 AM, Braden Shepherdson
> >>>>>>>>> <braden@chromium.org>wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I'm working on rolling some of the plugin JS
loading logic into
> >>>>>>>>>> cordova-js.
> >>>>>>>>>> If that makes this release then it will be possible
to play with
> >>>>>> plugman
> >>>>>>>>>> without also needing bleeding-edge JS. Note
that this logic
> >>>>>>>>>>won't be
> >>>>>>>>>> active
> >>>>>>>>>> if there are no plugins, so it shouldn't be
a high-risk change
> to
> >>>>>> slide
> >>>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>> before a release.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Andrew Grieve
<
> >>>> agrieve@chromium.org
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Time's feeling right for a release.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm planning on going through pull requests
today. Makes sense
> >>>>>>>>>>>to
> >>>> get
> >>>>>>>>>> those
> >>>>>>>>>>> all in before starting the release.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:49 AM, James Jong
> >>>>>>>>>>><wjamesjong@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> A couple of items I'd like to see get
into 2.6:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Lorin's EXIF camera implementation
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2) adding prompt dialog to the Notification
API (completed,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>just
> >>>>>>>>>> needs
> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>> be merged in)
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/cordova-docs/pull/24
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/cordova-js/pull/21
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/cordova-ios/pull/35
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/cordova-android/pull/35
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/cordova-mobile-spec/pull/13
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> -James Jong
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 19, 2013, at 6:46 PM, Brian LeRoux
<b@brian.io> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Ya braden put that huge thread on
the list w/ the docs..
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 3:22 PM,
Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Haha have we even brought back
the new method to the list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>since
> >>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> F2F?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/19/13 3:21 PM, "Brian LeRoux"
<b@brian.io> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, lets give this new
method a go.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at
1:24 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How we feeling for that?
Are there any outstanding
> features
> >>>> out
> >>>>>>>>>>> there
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are on the cusp of landing,
or can we go into rc + test
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>mode
> >>>>>>>>>>> soon-ish?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >
>

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