Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cordova.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of brian.leroux@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.223.181 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: brian.leroux@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: 
 <CANpVHHxCtrmR0GzEFehvv5W4Tg2FreJqkVx+WDCQ5BJMCzSDHA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CD70D110.1AB42%fil@adobe.com>
	<86A8B359-970B-43FD-BC97-C1DB594F6BCC@gmail.com>
	<CADVgkyM7z+5b571Nn0OZVvatPeYGWAJ2gKfPX7vE2vGuDmLuJg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANpVHHxCtrmR0GzEFehvv5W4Tg2FreJqkVx+WDCQ5BJMCzSDHA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 15:40:44 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CADVgkyNt5v=OorHSN+51khuFmsUn29KhQpAHsA4pLcXsdSj2fg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: archiving older platforms
From: Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Attic seems like more work than outright neglect. Might be for
conceptual purity we want to move Bada there but I could see Qt and
webOS rising from their slumber.


On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Anis KADRI <anis.kadri@gmail.com> wrote:
> and no apache attic [1] ?
>
> [1] http://attic.apache.org/
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 3:28 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>
>> This means we're going to leave Bada, Qt, webOS at their latest tags,
>> and not dist. (Code still accessible, etc.)
>>
>> We'll continue as normal for BB, for now.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Gord Tanner <gtanner@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I am confused, who are the stewards and what platforms are being
>> stewarded?
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> > On 2013-03-21, at 6:00 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> On 3/21/13 2:12 PM, "Shazron" <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> +1
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> +1
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Ok, I think we have agreement that we'll put these guys on hold until
>> >>>>> they find a steward. This means:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - we won't be taggin them further
>> >>>>> - we won't be including them in a release
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> This does not mean:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> - deletion or archiving or attic for the src
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> (Think of it as a pause button!)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Agree/disagree?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
>> >
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>> If there are no fixes going into these platforms, then there is no
>> >>>>> benefit
>> >>>>>> in their users updating them to newer versions of Cordova.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> There's going to be more refactoring required when moving plugins to
>> >>>>> their
>> >>>>>> own repos. We'll really need owners for all platforms that will make
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>> transition, or else we won't have any way to test that the
>> >>>> refactoring
>> >>>>>> hasn't broken a platform. On specific example is that blackberry's
>> >>>> JS
>> >>>>> repo
>> >>>>>> is really 4-in-1 currently, and our plugin spec doesn't have support
>> >>>> for
>> >>>>>> this. They will need to be split out into 4 separate platforms, at
>> >>>> least
>> >>>>> as
>> >>>>>> far as the JS is concerned.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> So... I guess my +1 is just for any platform that doesn't have a
>> >>>> someone
>> >>>>>> willing to focus on it. E.g. I'm fine with keeping WebOS around if
>> >>>> Markus
>> >>>>>> wants to do the work to support it through this transition.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 10:52 PM, Ken Wallis
>> >>>> <kwallis@blackberry.com>
>> >>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> We will try to provide relevant stats on platform adoption as we
>> >>>> are
>> >>>>> able.
>> >>>>>>> I am anxiously awaiting that information myself. ;)
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> While lacking this information, I still feel that BBOS will be
>> >>>> with us
>> >>>>> for
>> >>>>>>> a deal of time, particularly in the enterprise where we are seeing
>> >>>> a
>> >>>>>>> significant trend towards Cordova/PhoneGap/WebWorks as the primary
>> >>>>> platform
>> >>>>>>> of choice for apps. This is, frustratingly, a difficult market to
>> >>>> get
>> >>>>>>> adequate metrics out of, as they will typically not use PhoneGap
>> >>>> Build
>> >>>>> IMO,
>> >>>>>>> and they don't deploy to commercial application stores. A bit of a
>> >>>> black
>> >>>>>>> box, but our enterprise support teams continually support the
>> >>>> notion
>> >>>>> that
>> >>>>>>> enterprise looks at HTML5 apps first.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> In this regard, we would like to see support for BBOS be
>> >>>> maintained in
>> >>>>> the
>> >>>>>>> short term. Our team is focused on bringing up BlackBerry 10 built
>> >>>> on
>> >>>>>>> Cordova, and once that has gotten to a stable point we will then be
>> >>>>> able to
>> >>>>>>> look at resources and determine if BBOS is still a valuable
>> >>>> platform
>> >>>> to
>> >>>>>>> support and if we can port BBOS to the new structures.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Hope that makes sense.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Sent from my BlackBerry Z10 smartphone.
>> >>>>>>> From: Anis KADRI
>> >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, March 18, 2013 1:00 PM
>> >>>>>>> To: dev@cordova.apache.org
>> >>>>>>> Reply To: dev@cordova.apache.org
>> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: archiving older platforms
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> s/QR/Qt
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Lorin Beer
>> >>>> <lorin.beer.dev@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> +1 Bada/webOS/QR
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> echoing Michael's point, I'd like to see usage stats on the
>> >>>> older BB
>> >>>>>>>> platforms. BB10 should absolutely be the focus, but If they are
>> >>>>> currently
>> >>>>>>>> being used, mothballing may be premature. Revisiting the issues
>> >>>>>>> regularly,
>> >>>>>>>> and making one based on usage stats makes the most sense to me.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> +1 all of them, Java and Air implementations of BlackBerry as
>> >>>> well.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> For the older implementations of BlackBerry, nothing is
>> >>>> stopping
>> >>>>> anyone
>> >>>>>>>>> from using that code. The fact is that Java and Air-related
>> >>>> fixes
>> >>>>> have
>> >>>>>>>> not
>> >>>>>>>>> been going in regularly. The implementations are stable enough
>> >>>> that
>> >>>>>>>>> drawing a line in the sand and saying no more active support
>> >>>> for
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>>>> older
>> >>>>>>>>> BB SDKs is acceptable in my opinion.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On 3/17/13 11:44 AM, "Michael Brooks"
>> >>>> <michael@michaelbrooks.ca>
>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> As far as bb 6 and 7, I am sure the majority of devices out
>> >>>> there
>> >>>>>>> are
>> >>>>>>>>>>> BB 6
>> >>>>>>>>>>> and 7. BB10 just came out so there can't be that many yet.
>> >>>>>>> Developers
>> >>>>>>>>>>> don't
>> >>>>>>>>>>> seem to be interested in those platform though and I think
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>> focus
>> >>>>>>>>>>> should
>> >>>>>>>>>>> be on BB10.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> It would probably be more accurate to say "BlackBerry Java"
>> >>>> which
>> >>>>>>>> includes
>> >>>>>>>>>> BB 4.6/5/6/7 - yep, we "support" all the way back 4.6
>> >>>> although no
>> >>>>> one
>> >>>>>>>>>> tests
>> >>>>>>>>>> that far back anymore.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> I've heard BlackBerry voice the opinion that they would like
>> >>>> to
>> >>>> see
>> >>>>>>>> Apache
>> >>>>>>>>>> Cordova focus solely on BlackBerry 10. However, PhoneGap/Build
>> >>>> has
>> >>>>>>> seen
>> >>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>>>> large demand for BlackBerry 5 and 6.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 Bada
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 webOS - we may want to bring this out of the Attic in the
>> >>>> future
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> +1 QR - we may want to bring it this out of the Attic when
>> >>>> gearing
>> >>>>> up
>> >>>>>>>> for
>> >>>>>>>>>> Ubuntu Phone
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> +0 BB - I want to talk with the our PhoneGap/Build team to
>> >>>> better
>> >>>>>>>>>> understand their stance. I'd also like Ken or Jeff from
>> >>>> BlackBerry
>> >>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>> chime
>> >>>>>>>>>> in with their opinion.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:11 AM, Anis KADRI <
>> >>>> anis.kadri@gmail.com
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1 to kill those platforms and archive them in the attic :-D
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> If WebOS, Qt become relevant again we can revive them from
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>>> attic.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Anis KADRI <
>> >>>>> anis.kadri@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> According to [1]:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> "Projects whose PMC are unable to muster 3 votes for a
>> >>>> release,
>> >>>>>>> who
>> >>>>>>>>>>> have
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> no active committers or are unable to fulfill their
>> >>>> reporting
>> >>>>>>> duties
>> >>>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> board are all good candidates for the Attic."
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I believe those projects satisfy the "no active
>> >>>> committers"
>> >>>>>>>> argument.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't see any active committers for Bada, Qt or WebOS.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Markus Leutwyler is the only WebOS committer and is no
>> >>>> longer
>> >>>>>>>>>>> employed by
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the company that is in charge of it and I am not sure if
>> >>>> he's
>> >>>>>>> still
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> interested in maintaining it. There are still devices out
>> >>>>> there I
>> >>>>>>> am
>> >>>>>>>>>>> sure
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> but no new devices are getting shipped.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Bada is officially dead [2] but they still released an
>> >>>> SDK a
>> >>>>>>> couple
>> >>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> weeks ago [3] O_O! They still owned #4 spot in Q3 2012
>> >>>> ahead
>> >>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Windows
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Phone [4]
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> As far as bb 6 and 7, I am sure the majority of devices
>> >>>> out
>> >>>>> there
>> >>>>>>>> are
>> >>>>>>>>>>> BB
>> >>>>>>>>>>> 6
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> and 7. BB10 just came out so there can't be that many yet.
>> >>>>>>>> Developers
>> >>>>>>>>>>> don't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> seem to be interested in those platform though and I think
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>>> focus
>> >>>>>>>>>>> should
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> be on BB10.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [1] http://attic.apache.org/
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [2]
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> http://www.fiercemobilecontent.com/story/samsung-scraps-bada-os-folds-it-
>> >>>>>>>>>>> tizen/2013-02-25
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [3] http://static.bada.com/releasenotes/2.0.6.html
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> [4] http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2237315
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 10:15 PM, Brian LeRoux
>> >>>> <b@brian.io>
>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The question has come up about our continued support for:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - bada
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - webos
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - qt
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> - bb6 & bb7
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Nobody is currently actively maintaining Bada, and Qt.
>> >>>>> However, I
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> could see us wanting to keep Qt around given Ubuntu
>> >>>> Phone.
>> >>>>> There
>> >>>>>>>> are
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> no new webOS devices, though rumours persist they could
>> >>>>> happen,
>> >>>>>>> it
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> seems like its more of a ceremony than real support. The
>> >>>>> older BB
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> platforms are maintained but the real focus is BB10.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>>>>> This transmission (including any attachments) may contain
>> >>>> confidential
>> >>>>>>> information, privileged material (including material protected by
>> >>>> the
>> >>>>>>> solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute
>> >>>>> non-public
>> >>>>>>> information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the
>> >>>>> intended
>> >>>>>>> recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in
>> >>>>> error,
>> >>>>>>> please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information
>> >>>> from
>> >>>>>>> your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of
>> >>>> this
>> >>>>>>> transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be
>> >>>>> unlawful.
>> >>
>>