cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: Android - Removing the .api namespace
Date Tue, 30 Jul 2013 19:08:05 GMT
Can I ask who's angry?

What would we put in a point release other than updating the docs? I
attempted a shim, but found that it was not that easy because .api.Foo
instanceof Foo, but Foo is not instanceof .api.Foo. Users need to update
all of their plugins for 3.0 anyways, and this has to be one of the
smallest changes.

The upgrade docs are actually fine for the CLI case, since they say to
create a new project with the new template.


On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:

> Bah, this thread must have slipped my radar, apologies. I was replying to
> the other one. Sigh.
>
> On 7/30/13 11:57 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >So, yeah, remember how I fought this, and then suddenly we came to
> >consensus because it's better to break everything all at once?
> >
> >https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-4454
> >
> >Can we actually follow our deprecation policy from now on? There's
> >people there who are being unreasonable and asking for us to extend
> >deprecation times to be a year in length because we do things like
> >this.
> >
> >
> >On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Simon MacDonald
> ><simon.macdonald@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Yup, break everything at once.
> >>
> >>
> >> Simon Mac Donald
> >> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Marcel Kinard <cmarcelk@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>> Normally being very averse to changing pubic API's, I'm with Andrew and
> >>> Ian on this. If we are going to be making breaking changes, especially
> >>>if
> >>> they are small, do them all at once.
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 9, 2013, at 11:06 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > So far, we've asked plugin developers to migrate from the old-style
> >>> > plugins to CordovaPlugin so that their plugins will work with 3.0.0.
> >>> > Many plugin developers have already done that.
> >>>
> >>> We have migrated our plugins, but have third-party plugins done the
> >>>same?
> >>> Or do they wait for us to release the breaking change and then they are
> >>> "forced" to update their plugin? I'm guessing the latter, but that is
> >>>just
> >>> a guess.
> >>>
> >>> I think what would help here is a Plugin Migration Guide in
> >>>cordova-docs
> >>> that gives a nice list of what the plugin developer needs to do. Most
> >>> plugin devs are probably OK with making changes, as long as we tell
> >>>them
> >>> what they need to know.
> >>>
> >>> If there is a third-party plugin that an app developer needs that is
> >>> abandonware, then they can stick with 2.9.x until the plugin gets
> >>>updated.
> >>>
> >>>
>
>

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