Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-25026-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 B3918109B6
	for <apmail-cordova-dev-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:33:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 25469 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jul 2013 22:33:13 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-cordova-dev-archive@cordova.apache.org
Received: (qmail 25441 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jul 2013 22:33:13 -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 25433 invoked by uid 99); 24 Jul 2013 22:33:13 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:33:13 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=5.0
	tests=FRT_ADOBE2,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of fil@adobe.com designates
 64.18.1.191 as permitted sender)
Received: from [64.18.1.191] (HELO exprod6og106.obsmtp.com) (64.18.1.191)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 22:33:05 +0000
Received: from outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com ([192.150.11.134]) by
 exprod6ob106.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP
	ID DSNKUfBWDPb2DesAJirDrYaaOyDsC7CV3TXn@postini.com;
 Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:32:44 PDT
Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51])
	by outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
 r6OMTHD8015250
	for <dev@cordova.apache.org>; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:29:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SJ1SWM219.corp.adobe.com (sj1swm219.corp.adobe.com
 [10.5.77.61])
	by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id
 r6OMWZ6L011915
	for <dev@cordova.apache.org>; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:32:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.95]) by
 SJ1SWM219.corp.adobe.com ([fe80::d55c:7209:7a34:fcf7%11]) with mapi; Wed, 24
 Jul 2013 15:31:55 -0700
From: Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
To: "dev@cordova.apache.org" <dev@cordova.apache.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 15:31:53 -0700
Subject: Re: Plugin versioning
Thread-Topic: Plugin versioning
Thread-Index: Ac6IvZn5b7LhmE0JTLCgZ5tR+SOG7w==
Message-ID: <CE15A3C7.22E6C%fil@adobe.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAE6O_-ZUi9ZbS62ZLPy_1ftJ2VxfMJa5=2qi57dCA0WkPzCSFw@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.3.5.130515
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

Let's kick up a new section in the Release wiki document to cover how to
handle plugins.

We can discuss in more details when we schedule our post-3.0 committer
meeting.

On 7/24/13 3:27 PM, "Shazron" <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:

>In any case I'm taking the easy way out for now and just fixing the code
>and not adding that new selector to the commanddelegate :P
>
>
>On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I like it existing in the <platform> tag as Tim suggested.
>>
>> Fil - that makes sense, we should doc all these rules
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What about this as a rule of thumb for plugins:
>>>
>>> If the <engine> requirements within a plugin's XML if bumped up, we
>>>MUST
>>> bump the plugin's MAJOR version
>>>
>>> Since we're versioning plugins on their own it should be fine, ya?
>>>Kind of
>>> like how the tooling is versioned on its own pretty much.
>>>
>>> On 7/24/13 2:39 PM, "Shazron" <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >So when cordova adding plugins it does an <engine> check, yes?
>>> >
>>> >I've got this situation where I want to add a new method to
>>> >CDVCommandDelegate (see my last comment in the issue below):
>>> >https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-4355
>>> >
>>> >Basically I want to do this with minimal hassle to devs... (I suppose
>>>I
>>> >could do a respondsToSelector, but that's just ugly)
>>>
>>>
>>