cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: Releases in a 3.0 World
Date Tue, 03 Sep 2013 16:54:22 GMT
For Strategy page:

RE: Weekly Releases -- do we skip a release if there is nothing significant
to push, or do we release so long as there is at least one patch?
RE: Cadence Releases -- "These releases include: platform repos,
cordova-js, mobile-spec, cordova-docs, cordova-cli, cordova-plugman" --
clarifying that "include" for the sem-ver projects means only packaging
into a zip/tarball, not that we bump versions numbers during a cadence
release?  Or do we bump sem-ver as well?

======

For plugin release page:
  "# Edit version within plugin.xml based off of changes."   --- this means
"deduce the semantic effect on version" right?  IE, is it a
major/minor/point release?

Generally, how do we prevent changes from sneaking in to core plugins
during the time it takes release master to make the changes?  The release
master has to commit back to Changelog.  Perhaps he/she makes that change
directly on master, and we rebase that change back into dev after the
release?  That way, we don't read from dev branch once a release process is
started.

"For each plugin that had unreleased commits .. increment the micro"  --
why?

TEST section -- suggest adding a not to the top of the guide so that you
create mobile-spec BEFORE starting the release.  This way, you create a
project with the old versions of plugins more easily.

======

Generally these looks really good (haven't finished reading Cadence release
doc yet, will comment on that soon).  However, while I love the code
snippets for suggested commands, some of them look like they wouldn't work
if you copy&paste them.  Perhaps we should go through the docs on the next
release and make it clear which are verbatim commands and which are just
documentation-with-code.




On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org> wrote:

> Finally finished updating the wiki's instructions to follow this proposal.
>
> Summary of changes:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/VersioningAndReleaseStrategy
>   - Explains our versioning strategy (SemVer vs CadVer)
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CommitterWorkflow
>   - Extracted Pull Requst Processing into its own page (
> ProcessingPullRequests<
> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/ProcessingPullRequests>
> )
>   - Added a "Which Branch to Commit To" section
>   - Minor tweaks to commit process:
>     - Mention `git rebase origin/master -i`
>     - Marked some steps as optional
>     - Linked to post-review (rbtools) install page
>     - Made it more explicit that you should test commits you patch in
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/StepsForPluginRelease
>   - Process to go through to update core plugins
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/StepsForToolsRelease
>   - Process to go through to update plugman / CLI
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CuttingReleases
>   - Made it clear that it applies to Cadence Releases
>   - Expanded "What to test" section
>   - Added releasing of CLI to the steps
>   - Moved "Official Apache Releases" to the bottom
>
> To all steps release steps pages, I've added an "Update CHANGELOG.md" step.
> iOS has done this forever, but I think all repos should do it.
>
> Would love if these pages could be read by all committers. Especially the
> StepsForToolsRelease page, as I've never done a tools release (and so was
> somewhat guessing).
>
> Another part I'm unsure of is where the mapping to platform repo versions
> is within CLI.
>
> There are still some points to discuss, which I will send separate emails
> about :)
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Ian Clelland <iclelland@google.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > After the discussion on the group hangout + some sleeping, I think
> we're
> > > ready for a proposal... So here it is!
> > > - It does *not* propose any changes to our Deprecation policy. That's
> for
> > > another thread (which I'll get to on Monday if no one else does) :)
> > > - It does not contain how we store version numbers. That's covered
> here:
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/StoringRepoVersionsDesign
> > >
> > > Once we get to a consensus, I'll transfer this to the wiki. Please
> > review &
> > > comment!
> > >
> > > There are two kinds of versions:
> > > 1. "SemVer" (www.semver.org)
> > >    - Used by platforms, plugman, cli
> > > 2. "CadVer" (just made that up :P "Cadence Version")
> > >    - Used by cli, mobile-spec, cordova-js
> > >
> > >
> > I like this, as it separates the fast-moving, feature-based semantic
> > version of any given component from the API level, and interoperability
> > promises, of the "Cadence Version".
> >
> > What, then, is the granularity of the Cadence Version intended to be? Is
> is
> > the "3" in Cordova 3.0, and will stay at 3 until it hits 4 next year?
> (Or,
> > just as descriptively, we can say that it is at "Cordova Fancy-Pants"
> now,
> > and eventually progress to "Cordova Enraged-Wombat")
> >
> > Or is it going to have major and minor components as well, and advance
> > roughly monthly, as before?
> >
> >
> > > There are two kinds of releases:
> > > 1. Patch releases
> > >    - Pretty much any repo can release a patch release to fix bugs at
> any
> > > time (but should have good reason)
> > > 2. Cadence releases
> > >    - These follow the 10 releases per year, as enumerated on:
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/RoadmapProjects
> > >
> > > cordova-plugins:
> > >  - Commit only to the `dev` branch
> > >  - Use semver for them.
> > >    - If the version on master is "3.0.0", then the version on dev will
> > > start at "3.0.1-dev".
> > >    - If any commit goes in that add a feature, then change the version
> on
> > > dev to "3.1.0-dev"
> > >    - If any commit goes in that makes an non-backwards-compatible
> change,
> > > then change the version on dev to "4.0.0-dev"
> > >  - Release plugins at most once a week (Thursdays?)
> > >    - This *does* mean that a change that goes in Wednesday could end up
> > > being released the next day.
> > >  - Release plugins all at the same time so that we can blog the release
> > > notes.
> > >  - Release process:
> > >    1. Create a JIRA issue to track the status of the release.
> > >      a. Comments should be added to this bug after each top-level step
> > > below is taken
> > >    2. For each plugin that has unreleased commits on their `dev`
> branch:
> > >      a. Update its CHANGELOG file with a prettified version of "git
> log"
> > >      b. Update its plugin.xml version by removing the "-dev" suffix
> > >      c. Merge dev -> master (without pushing)
> > >      d. Update its plugin.xml version by incrementing the micro and
> > adding
> > > "-dev" (as described above)
> > >    3. Combine all plugin changelogs into a Release announcement blog
> post
> > > on cordova-website.
> > >      a. Steps for this exist in cordova-website's README.md
> > >    4. Test
> > >      a. Create mobilespec using the old versions of plugins
> > >      b. Perform a "plugin upgrade" for plugins that have changes (right
> > > now, this means doing a `plugin remove` followed by a `plugin add`
> > >      c. Run through mobilespec, ensuring to do manual tests that relate
> > to
> > > changes in the changelog
> > >    5. Push!
> > >      a. Push all branches
> > >      b. Push the blog post
> > >
> > > cordova-plugman:
> > >   - Commit to master always
> > >   - Release only when necessary.
> > >   - Release process:
> > >     1. For releases that increment the minor or major, email the dev
> list
> > > to let others know about your intent to release (include changelog)
> > >        a) Wait for at least one +1
> > >     2. Increment the version within package.json
> > >     3. Update RELEASENOTES.md with the changes for this release
> > >     4. Push to npmjs.org
> > >        * In order to push, you must be given push access to the npm
> > module.
> > >        * To do so, ask one of the existing module maintainers (listed
> > here:
> > > https://npmjs.org/package/plugman)
> > >     5. Post a release announcement on the cordova blog (for feature
> > > releases only)
> > >       a. Steps for this exist in cordova-website's README.md
> > >       b. Not necessary for patch releases, but feature releases should
> > > mention significant bugs fixed by previous patch releases.
> > >
> > > No JIRA: The process is light-weight enough that a JIRA issue isn't
> > > necessary for tracking.
> > >
> > >
> > > cordova-cli:
> > >   - Commit to master, release from release branches (2.9.x, 3.0.x, etc)
> > >   - Versioned using "$COROVA_VERSION-$CLI_VERSION"
> > >     - E.g. 3.0.0-0.5.1
> > >     - The first version component is the "cadence version", and has its
> > > minor incremented whenever the platform repository that it lazy loads
> by
> > > default is changed
> > >        - E.g. 3.0.0 uses cordova-blackberry@3.0.0, cordova-ios@3.0.0,
> > > cordova-android@3.0.0
> > >        - E.g. 3.1.0 uses cordova-blackberry@3.1.0, cordova-ios@3.0.1,
> > > cordova-android@4.0.0
> > >         - E.g. 3.2.0 uses cordova-blackberry@3.1.1, cordova-ios@3.1.0,
> > > cordova-android@4.0.1
> > >        - E.g. 3.2.1 uses cordova-blackberry@3.1.2, cordova-ios@3.1.0,
> > > cordova-android@4.0.1
> > >   - The version number of cordova-cli will be the version number that
> we
> > > advertise on our website, blogs & docs
> > >        - Platform version numbers will use semver, and not be
> referenced
> > >   - Release process for patch releases:
> > >     1. cherry-pick commits from master -> latest release branch
> > >     2. Increment package.json's micro version
> > >     3. Update RELEASENOTES.md
> > >     4. Push to npmjs.org
> > >        * In order to push, you must be given push access to the npm
> > module.
> > >        * To do so, ask one of the existing module maintainers (listed
> > here:
> > > https://npmjs.org/package/cordova)
> > >   - Release process for minor version
> > >     - Same as patch release, and in addition:
> > >       1. Email the dev list to let others know about your intent to
> > release
> > > (include changelog)
> > >          a. Wait for at least one +1
> > >       2. Post a release announcement on the cordova blog (for feature
> > > releases only)
> > >         a. Steps for this exist in cordova-website's README.md
> > >         b. Not necessary for patch releases, but feature releases
> should
> > > mention significant bugs fixed by previous patch releases.
> > >   - Release process for major version:
> > >     - Refer to platform release process.
> > >
> > > cordova platforms, mobile-spec, cordova-js:
> > >   - Same as before (as documented on
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CuttingReleases)
> > >   - Except:
> > >     - Platforms versions to use semver. This *does* mean that they will
> > > diverge from each other.
> > >     - cordova-js and cordova-mobile-spec to use the "cadence version"
> > > (first part of cordova-cli's version)
> > >     - No longer update cordova-app-template
> > >     - Blog post will include changelog for all changes since previous
> > > platforms release.
> > >     - JIRA issue should have a comment that lists the platform versions
> > > that are referenced by the cadence version.
> > >
> > > JIRA workflow:
> > >   - When issues are closed, the "fixed version" should be set to the
> > > cadence version.
> > >
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Michael Brooks <
> > michael@michaelbrooks.ca
> > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Plugins and CLI tools I think we should just ship continuously.
> The
> > > >>
> > > > Why do you think these should be shipped continuously instead of on a
> > > > regular cadence? Note that I think they should be as well, but I'm
> > trying
> > > > to figure out why the tools & plugins are different from the
> platforms.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> > only question that remains in the 'how' of that is versioning.
> Mike
> > > >> > Brookes has advocated semver schema here wherein we version
> > platforms
> > > >> > separately from the tools using a compound version number. An
> > example
> > > >> > of this might be 3.0.0-0.14.3 wherein 3.0.0 represents our
> platforms
> > > >> > while 0.14.3 represents the CLI tool itself.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> I only advocate semver for node modules and you can expect that I'll
> > be
> > > >> pushing this on cordova-cli soon. :)
> > > >>
> > > >> Node modules use semver. Regardless of whether it's effective or
> not,
> > > it's
> > > >> what the community uses and as developers we should attempt to
> respect
> > > and
> > > >> adhere to it.
> > > >> However, Cordova uses a different type of versioning scheme.
> > > >>
> > > >> The CLI tool needs to represent both of these versioning schemes.
> > > >>
> > > >> - The Cordova version is most important, because it describe what
> > > version
> > > >> of Cordova the CLI uses.
> > > >> - The node module version is important to modules consuming
> > cordova-cli.
> > > >> You have no idea how frustrating cordova-cli's current versioning
is
> > wrt
> > > >> to
> > > >> the phonegap-cli.
> > > >>
> > > >> This is why a version such as 3.0.0-0.10.4 works extremely well.
> It's
> > > >> distributing version 3.0.0 of Cordova. The node module itself is
> > version
> > > >> 0.10.4. It's also semantically valid in semver, so it's compatible
> > with
> > > >> npm.
> > > >>
> > > >> Michael
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
> >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > I think keeping the cadence on the core platforms makes
sense.
> > That
> > > is
> > > >> > > where the bulk of logic lives, it is susceptible to 3rd
party
> > issues
> > > >> > > like new iDEs and SDKs, and having that regular cadence
in
> > lockstep
> > > >> > > makes issue tracking easier to discuss with the community.
> > > >>
> > > > I agree that keeping the number of different version numbers to a
> > minimum
> > > > makes things easier to track.
> > > > I don't really follow your logic about IDEs and SDKs... This would be
> > an
> > > > argument to *not* synchronize releases I think, since
> iOS/Android/WP/BB
> > > do
> > > > not synchronize their SDK releases :P
> > > > I don't think we can apply the cadence argument to platforms, but not
> > to
> > > > tools & plugins. Why would platforms be different in this respect?
> > > >
> > > >  > >
> > > >> > > Plugins and CLI tools I think we should just ship continuously.
> > The
> > > >> > > only question that remains in the 'how' of that is versioning.
> > Mike
> > > >> > > Brookes has advocated semver schema here wherein we version
> > > platforms
> > > >> > > separately from the tools using a compound version number.
An
> > > example
> > > >> > > of this might be 3.0.0-0.14.3 wherein 3.0.0 represents our
> > platforms
> > > >> > > while 0.14.3 represents the CLI tool itself.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > I am not a fan of semver as that it is almost wholly conceptual
> > and
> > > >> > > thusly non-enforcable. It is a nice framework for reasoning
but
> > ppl
> > > >> > > ignore half of the rules devaluing its promise. Also, it
was
> > > conceived
> > > >> > > originally as a solution for globally installed packages
which
> > isn't
> > > >> > > really an issue in modern situations. That said, having
a
> > versioning
> > > >> > > scheme that exists, is well documented, and generally understood
> > are
> > > >> > > all positives for me. It would mean our deprec policy could
push
> > the
> > > >> > > version numbers up quickly (which is fine).
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > It is important to remember the reason for versioning, for
our
> > case,
> > > >> > > is issue tracking and resolution but as our ecosystem grows
it
> > will
> > > >> > > also play a very important role in dependency management.
> > Especially
> > > >> > > between plugins. More discreet versions: the better.
> > > >>
> > > > With the latest <engine> tag work being done (
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-4490), platforms as well as
> > > > plugins will be checked using semver. These checks will likely work
> > > better
> > > > if we try and follow semver. AFAICT, we mostly do already follow it,
> > with
> > > > the exception of our deprecation policy.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > (Andrew I think you should start a separate thread about
killing
> > off
> > > >> > > cordova-js and moving into platforms for loading now that
we
> have
> > > >> > > mostly removed the plugins. I am very much in favor!)
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > Yeah, I regretted this almost immediately. Since this thread
is
> > > >> focusing on
> > > >> > the platforms, I'll do just that!
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Andrew Grieve <
> > agrieve@chromium.org
> > > >
> > > >> > > wrote:
> > > >> > > > Want to have this as a discussion starter.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > We've previously established that:
> > > >> > > > 1. Releases for plugman & CLI will not be tied
to platform
> > > releases
> > > >> > > > 2. Releases to plugins will not be tied to platform
releases
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > That's not to say we shouldn't sometime co-ordinate
them with
> > > >> platform
> > > >> > > > releases, but I think there would need to be a compelling
> reason
> > > to
> > > >> > > couple
> > > >> > > > them.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I'm wondering if it makes sense to not tie platform
releases
> > > >> together
> > > >> > > > either? E.g. Allow an update to cordova-ios separately
from
> > > >> > > > cordova-blackberry10.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Possible Advantages:
> > > >> > > >   - Releases will (hopefully) occur more frequently.
Don't
> need
> > to
> > > >> wait
> > > >> > > for
> > > >> > > > synchronization with other platforms to do a release.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Possible Disadvantages:
> > > >> > > >   - Might make for too many releases & spam our
users with
> > release
> > > >> > notes
> > > >> > > > too often
> > > >> > > >   - Might make us lazy and release platforms too infrequently
> > > >> > > >   - Might make version numbers for platforms not correspond
> > > >> date-wise
> > > >> > > with
> > > >> > > > version numbers of other platforms (e.g. 3.1 ios !=
3.1
> android)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Other considerations:
> > > >> > > >   cordova-js is a common piece here. Perhaps that could
be
> > pulled
> > > >> out
> > > >> > as
> > > >> > > > well?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Option 1: Bundle the exec bridge, platform bootstrap
& plugin
> > > loader
> > > >> > with
> > > >> > > > the platform, and have the rest available as a plugin.
> > > >> > > > Option 2: Bundle exec bridge + platform bootstrap with
the
> > > platform,
> > > >> > > bundle
> > > >> > > > the plugin loader with plugman, put the rest in a plugin
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > For reference, the only non-exec-bridge / start-up
code I can
> > see
> > > >> is:
> > > >> > > > ./cordova.js   <--- hooks addEventListener + has
exec bridge
> > logic
> > > >> > > > ./common/argscheck.js   <--- strictly a helper for
plugins
> > > >> > > > ./common/base64.js   <--- exec bridge depends on
this
> > > >> > > > ./common/builder.js  <--- should be folded into
> modulemapper.js
> > > >> > > > ./common/channel.js  <--- start-up code needs this
> > > >> > > > ./common/init.js  <--- start-up code
> > > >> > > > ./common/modulemapper.js  <--- start-up code
> > > >> > > > ./common/pluginloader.js  <--- loads plugins on
start-up
> > > >> > > > ./common/urlutil.js   <--- recently added helper
for plugins
> > > >> > > > ./common/utils.js   <--- mostly misc stuff that
may be mostly
> > > >> unused?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > There's also:
> > > >> > > > ./windows8/windows8/commandProxy.js
> > > >> > > > which I assume is exec bridge releated.
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > I think that argscheck & urlutil would be well-suited
as
> > > stand-alone
> > > >> > > > plugins that other plugins depend on.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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