Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cordova.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of simon.macdonald@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.220.170 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEeF2Td8oWJbLfs8EbSqwsKL+wEQO6tm1ffkgxtnwKoeUBFYSg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAMSbhBh5gDZ4L8imjuVr11C=4PeudPVX_7XTKqTnQv2qMO1v5w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CDDC0758.20673%fil@adobe.com>
 <CAOBL_k4JaTwsxs+ZtXh1M6NiB0JccDjehrS5Qut3bS2c=_PNMw@mail.gmail.com>
 <BA49508C-D292-477E-B813-6EFBAE0292D3@redhat.com>
 <CAMk5LL=VKXkarJF9-6Vi065KmW=R62+xnXy5MqtZ=y1jxVtx8w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOBL_k7=uQyQL9pY8wT1xy6utZ_=7DfUHf6TFGTYdZu-UQP+rQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMk5LLmQ=VWaq5GDJcV7-x4YF26fapy4Nc_bY5zdBzMuK4n-WQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOBL_k4Q1W37kObFco+XTU3LBDOavjxDsvP9gG5n_FQwUqKWPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE6O_-ZoYv1cfgebAHvjtif8h942qdFdx9GGVzSDgx7BGNRYNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <9B58EFC5-1129-44A4-B7F9-A6C075DDFDC2@gmail.com>
 <CAHYtTq=tQa=KerfbSzLX6RaqL1MYrEQwjgzFL9o0AAG0bOrBKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMSbhBgjFSyoEepf-ZD46W1KZs0QbpXLbZkOr2srpoWpY5pyrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABiQX1WxaXg9g6XD__W5OQnzapeaAA5Xv+mLWT_L6CDMpnQJMA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEeF2Td8oWJbLfs8EbSqwsKL+wEQO6tm1ffkgxtnwKoeUBFYSg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Simon MacDonald <simon.macdonald@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:28:11 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CAM1AYQA_k_i1rt6yeJ+dhfqUtwqS-aPuQ7Nov9C_yKrho+U8uw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
To: "dev@cordova.apache.org" <dev@cordova.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0122ead4c3725504df5b3f2b

--089e0122ead4c3725504df5b3f2b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Yeah, I think we do 2.9.x whenever there are critical bug fixes. Should
never need to do a 2.10.0 those folks who need new features should move to
3.x.


Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald


On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:

> 2.10 would mean new features, 2.9.x would mean just bugfixes.  With that
> definition, we can make the release number decision as we evaluate the
> reason for a release.  I'm hoping to not need a 2.10, since it would imply
> people are not using 3.x yet.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
> >wrote:
>
> > Fun time to go on leave :)
> >
> > Good call on putting back Plugin.java for now.
> >
> > Definitely agree that we shouldn't have it for 3.0. But! We should point
> > out that plugins can copy & paste the file into their own package to make
> > old plugins "just work".
> >
> > Joe - one big thing that got missed in your blog post about converting to
> > CordovaPlugin is that the threading model changes. That's actually the
> > biggest change in my mind, and plugin devs need to be aware of it. The
> > default used to be that all calls were made on a new background thread,
> the
> > new way is to make the calls on the WebCore thread and have plugins
> > delegate to background / ui threads manually.
> >
> > If we're going to have more 2.x releases, I think it'd make more sense to
> > call them 2.10, 2.11 rather than 2.9.x. That said, I don't want to
> stretch
> > ourselves too thin by trying to maintain two very different branches.
> >
> > Marcel - I like your idea of adding release notes / deprecation notices
> to
> > the docs. Perhaps this could be merged with the upgrade guides?
> >
> > I've been thinking that it would be a good idea to have a Cordova blog
> > where committers could post to. I think an authoritative news source is
> > missing right now for Cordova. E.g. release announcements should go
> there,
> > what's new announcements, upgrade guides, new plugin announcements, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Steven Gill <stevengill97@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 2.8.1 just got pushed live. The site needs to be rebuilt still. My ruby
> > > dependencies are all messed up currently and are preventing me from
> > > rebuilding it.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Carlos Santana <csantana23@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > Can we put the website (cordova.io) on Github and accept pull
> > requests?
> > > >
> > > > I think this topic is a good one to take a closer look at our website
> > > being
> > > > the center of information that puts the wiki and docs in a single
> > place.
> > > >  Not saying to merge everything into one single code base or have
> > > > duplication but provide more rich information and pointers to docs
> and
> > > > wiki.
> > > >
> > > > Could have a "Release Notes" for the new version. Today the most
> > > effective
> > > > way to know what's new is to follow some of the Cordova guys blogs,
> and
> > > > this doesn't cover all platforms.
> > > >
> > > > We can start with a place holder now "Get ready for Cordova 3.0 !"
> > > >
> > > > My 2 cents.
> > > >
> > > > Ref:
> > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/UpdatingTheWebsite
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --Carlos
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com
> > <javascript:;>>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts,
> > tweets,
> > > > > > google groups.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly.  I don't know how I
> > > > > >> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated properly, why
> > is
> > > > > there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right
> things,
> > > but
> > > > > for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers.
> > > > >
> > > > > If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication, here
> are
> > > > some
> > > > > potential ways to improve that:
> > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I
> think
> > > > > Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And Simon
> has
> > a
> > > > blog
> > > > > post on this topic.
> > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that has:
> > > > >         - pointers to other places in the docs (i.e., device.name,
> > > > > org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which
> things
> > > are
> > > > > going away. And the history of which things already have gone away.
> > > > >         - in that detail, the version or date when they are going
> > away,
> > > > > and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova
> > > <platformX>
> > > > > Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you don't
> break
> > > > when
> > > > > they do go away.
> > > > >         - these would move it off the wiki into the docs, because
> > > perhaps
> > > > > consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should remain on
> > the
> > > > > wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is really
> > > > geared
> > > > > to contributors/committers, not consumers.
> > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in Cordova
> > > x.y".
> > > > > Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their
> blogs,
> > > but
> > > > > feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of
> making
> > > > more
> > > > > work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in the
> docs
> > > (if
> > > > > they are OK with that). That can include reminders of deprecation
> > hits.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by plugin
> > > > authors
> > > > > or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the
> > > > > @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something
> > offered
> > > by
> > > > > apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of content.
> > > Whatever
> > > > > it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so
> > consumers
> > > > > know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back months
> > later
> > > > and
> > > > > look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in 2.2?).
> > > > >
> > > > > Comments?
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Marcel Kinard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Carlos Santana
> > > > <csantana23@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

--089e0122ead4c3725504df5b3f2b--