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 agrieve@google.com designates
 209.85.160.43 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: agrieve@google.com
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEeF2Te=t7f=BgNX2wt=CFSpDE4KZV6L=46nQNYCtZ7bjcVpeg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CABiQX1XUzoccbRNEfZVNBv8z6sJ_quV_7fWUDGs8aw7saX5EGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEeF2Td19k-M2XC491so8gaQ6NMarGuXGbAZ_q4DsqqM5zWkKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMk5LL=r6xVt7b9iDoxU8jw+TeDqdZdpOK33bTKt_TXrUU45xQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMTxO42Jx-sH0hcjbuvG=quYzeR+SpcscM=BAxVLdpJ9dgKmOQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANpVHHwXCz049frWj6zaqdfsWeuUEYPivf98qHaE30fuWER7=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOBL_k5qQtH3OxN5Lxch+QzgeQJXwpnhw=0nQdMPKti-QyMyqw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAE6O_-Y-X=ExV2g0JOhDhLt5_9uMj1QwPy9a960U1Rf7Zy7ooQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK_TSXK16YuFF=yvpe2T=LRgdC53kF2vbwOk8DLNOypBGJNSTQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEeF2Te=t7f=BgNX2wt=CFSpDE4KZV6L=46nQNYCtZ7bjcVpeg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 11:57:58 -0400
Message-ID: 
 <CABiQX1WJG5GzTykFW3a7nsx0b0=MhmWRJaqTgMpCoR__jN0+wg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: When to update version numbers?
To: dev <dev@cordova.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b16018dbf3ddb04e590dfb4

--047d7b16018dbf3ddb04e590dfb4
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I like the --force idea. I think we'll want that anyways for plugins that
didn't write their <engine> tags right.


On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:

> I really don't want to have to be semantically valid for version
> dependencies amongst contributors working on the bleeding edge on
> unreleased branches.  I'd be fine with just leaving the semantically
> invalid engine values and make the dependency on "dev" implicit.  However,
> I would also support an explicit keyword like "dev", and then we are
> semantically valid, yet still only worry about assigning concrete versions
> id's at release time.
>
> -Michal
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Ian Clelland <iclelland@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I originally supported #1, because it makes development easier -- during
> > development, if you add features, you can update cordova-core from
> > "3.8-rc1" to "3.9-rc1", and then you can work on a corresponding plugin
> > that declares a dependency on "3.9-rc1".
> >
> > Without doing this, you need to have your plugin syntactically depend on
> > the latest *released* version of cordova (otherwise plugman will refuse
> to
> > install it), even though it only actually works with a recent development
> > version.
> >
> > If we can either add a "--force" option to plugman to make it ignore
> engine
> > version requirements, or somehow special-case a version keyword like
> "dev",
> > so that it always installs, then I can get behind #2.
> >
> > Ian
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 6:10 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 #2
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 for #2
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Anis KADRI <anis.kadri@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > +1 for number 2
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:16 AM, David Kemp <drkemp@google.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >> +1 for #2 as well
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Braden Shepherdson <
> > > braden@chromium.org
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> +1 for #2.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Michal Mocny <
> mmocny@chromium.org
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> > +1 for option #2
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Andrew Grieve <
> > > agrieve@chromium.org
> > > > >
> > > > >>> > wrote:
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > > For repos that use SemVer, there are two options:
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > 1. Update the version number at the time that the change is
> > made
> > > > >>> > > 2. Update the version number only when doing a release.
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > Right now, #2 is what I've put in the wiki instructions, but
> it
> > > > can be
> > > > >>> > > changed of course :)
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> > > Two main reasons I think #2 will work better:
> > > > >>> > >  - #1 might be too complicated (might forget to update it,
> may
> > > > update
> > > > >>> the
> > > > >>> > > version multiple times if multiple feature changes go in)
> > > > >>> > >  - #2 If doing a release, you should know what you're
> > releasing.
> > > > Having
> > > > >>> > to
> > > > >>> > > choose the right version number will force you to understand
> > what
> > > > >>> you're
> > > > >>> > > releasing.
> > > > >>> > >
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

--047d7b16018dbf3ddb04e590dfb4--