cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Tag 2.9.1
Date Thu, 17 Oct 2013 18:52:32 GMT
To reiterate (before updating the wiki page)

- Backporting ends with the 3.5 release (or six months, whichever comes
first)
- Only backport fixes to 2.9 for serious platform breakages and "easy"
plugin changes, not new features (iOS 7 changes are new features)
- No re-organizing of plugins to backport code to (for example in 3.0
the Notification
plugin diverged into the Notification and Vibration  plugins, so for 2.9 we
won't re-organize it also)




On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Dan,
> All feedback appreciated! It's one way to contribute, among others. I
> kicked off a Wiki page under "How to Contribute" -- called 2.9.x support,
> right now it's empty -- I'll populate it with what we discussed.
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/2.9.x%20Support
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Dan Moore <moore234@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I know this is a dev list, so please let me know if I'm out of line
>> posting (since I am a user and not a dev), but I couldn't restrain myself
>> from chiming in on this issue.
>>
>> First, thanks for supporting 2.9.x for a while.  As a user developing on
>> top of Cordova, chasing Cordova versions can be tough.  I really felt good
>> about committing to 2.9, especially since 3.x was such a big (good, but
>> big) change.
>>
>> As a user, I would advocate for:
>> * having a clear end of life date for 2.9.x (3.5 or 6 months or whichever
>> comes first).  The blog is a fine place to put this, but I'd also add it to
>> the 2.9 docs, announce it on the phonegap google group, etc.
>> * porting as much as possible back (including iOS 7 support)
>> * documenting what you can't or won't backport in the blog and in the
>> 2.9.x docs, so users can make an informed choice.
>>
>> From this thread, seems like you aren't interested in porting new device
>> support back to 2.9.x.  That is a bummer.  Is that because of the effort?
>>
>> When I read that 2.9.x was going to be supported for a 'long time':
>> http://www.infil00p.org/introducing-cordova-2-8-1-on-android/  I wasn't
>> sure what that meant, but I hoped it meant support for major new versions
>> of devices (especially on the two marquee platforms).
>>
>> As far as no one moving to 3.x, I would say that when you specify the end
>> of life of 2.9.x, that will be a clear signal it is time to move.
>>
>> Anyway, I'm sure I can live with whatever is decided, but please do
>> communicate this as clearly and loudly as you can to us users.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dan Moore
>> Developing with Cordova CLI
>> https://leanpub.com/developingwithcordovacli
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>  From: Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
>> To: "dev@cordova.apache.org" <dev@cordova.apache.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 9:02 AM
>> Subject: Re: Tag 2.9.1
>>
>>
>> yes and yes!
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Marcel Kinard <cmarcelk@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > So my intepretation of these comments is:
>> > - backport fixes to 2.9 for serious platform breakages and "easy" plugin
>> > changes, not new features (new device OS capability such as iOS 7 is
>> > considered a new feature)
>> > - stop backporting anything to 2.9 when 3.5 comes out
>> >
>> > If so, should this be spelled out somwhere, such as
>> > cordova.apache.org/blog?
>> >
>> > On Oct 15, 2013, at 8:24 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>> >
>> > > 3.5
>> > >
>> > > (Or six months.)
>> > >
>> > > But ya, what Jesse said.
>> > >
>> > > On Tuesday, October 15, 2013, Jesse wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I would not add iOS7 support.
>> > >> I would consider adding any plugin changes if it is not too difficult
>> > to do
>> > >> so.
>> > >>
>> > >> @purplecabbage
>> > >> risingj.com
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com
>> <javascript:;>>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> Nothing is "completely" broken in iOS 7, although with iOS 7 issues
>> > that
>> > >> is
>> > >>> debatable. If we keep patching 2.9.x no one will move on to 3.x...
>> (at
>> > >>> least for iOS). There has to be an ending...
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 4:53 PM, Jesse <purplecabbage@gmail.com
>> > <javascript:;>>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> Decide what is completely broken in your platform, that is
>> reasonable
>> > >> to
>> > >>>> fix, and fix it.
>> > >>>> No promises ... just fix what we can, and document that it
is
>> fixed. I
>> > >>>> think...
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> @purplecabbage
>> > >>>> risingj.com
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com
>> > <javascript:;>>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> One question about this that was not answered. When does
>> back-porting
>> > >>>> end?
>> > >>>>> I'm not sure what we promised for 2.9.x support going forward...
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Jesse <purplecabbage@gmail.com
>> > <javascript:;>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Okay, I am actively working on back-porting plugin
fixes into
>> 2.9.1
>> > >>> for
>> > >>>>>> WP7, WP8, and Windows8
>> > >>>>>> What is the status of Android, BB, iOS, ... ?
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> @purplecabbage
>> > >>>>>> risingj.com
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
>> > >>>>> purplecabbage@gmail.com <javascript:;>
>> > >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Yes, now that 3.1.0 is out the door, we can do
this.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> On Oct 7, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com
>> > <javascript:;>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> I think we need to just have everyone go through
their work
>> > >> over
>> > >>>> the
>> > >>>>>>>> past month and see if they missed backports.
 I didn't actually
>> > >>>> have
>> > >>>>>>>> very much missed, and I just backported the
File plugin in the
>> > >>>> 2.9.1
>> > >>>>>>>> branch.  Of course, with backporting, we need
more people to
>> > >> look
>> > >>>> at
>> > >>>>>>>> what was in 3.1.0 and the plugins and check
to make sure we
>> > >>>> backport
>> > >>>>>>>> everything, since this is really tricky and
spans all the
>> > >> plugin
>> > >>>>>>>> repos. :(
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Marcel
Kinard <
>> > >>>> cmarcelk@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
>> > >>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>> This thread seems to have gone quiet without
a consensus.
>> > >> Should
>> > >>>>> there
>> > >>>>>>> be additional 2.9.x releases going forward?
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> If so, how often? What kind of fixes should
be backported?
>> > >>> Include
>> > >>>>>>> updated docs?
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Oct 1, 2013, at 2:50 PM, Jesse <purplecabbage@gmail.com
>> > <javascript:;>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> As soon as we are done with 3.1.0 it
would be a good time to
>> > >> go
>> > >>>>> back
>> > >>>>>>> and
>> > >>>>>>>>>> back-fill for a 2,9,1 release.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> Who's with me?
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>

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