Return-Path: 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 C1614108C6 for ; Sat, 8 Feb 2014 19:34:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 12102 invoked by uid 500); 8 Feb 2014 19:34:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cordova-dev-archive@cordova.apache.org Received: (qmail 12033 invoked by uid 500); 8 Feb 2014 19:34:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cordova.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cordova.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cordova.apache.org Received: (qmail 12025 invoked by uid 99); 8 Feb 2014 19:34:25 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 08 Feb 2014 19:34:25 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of purplecabbage@gmail.com designates 209.85.192.171 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.192.171] (HELO mail-pd0-f171.google.com) (209.85.192.171) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 08 Feb 2014 19:34:19 +0000 Received: by mail-pd0-f171.google.com with SMTP id g10so4495950pdj.30 for ; Sat, 08 Feb 2014 11:33:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:references:from:content-type:in-reply-to:message-id:date:to :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=EOXjBVw60E6/B515Jky2as+dcWZHhS20zVQm/XDbkLw=; b=Ton3npro7K50tBMUAAVLbJ59nUyFysYwiePfnkywJtzosnYRP/PaQUUsIDcc7/0YTT W5QEeVOgXIX54lfMi2DD7rOyXoTqOGVrGy6Ihhy62yhMe1szw45Ul6+s9TaxABdTW/hr xrAPK3DYdx2FxIAZotagBXvdpb3iYtllJfIlcX1CyOL3w/wJoKSGGPxcPN2dwDoD1CvF vZsdcSru4OzflPAtRYyFiOEsKxw3T1MI3Yrc1geQR7NbQ8moy2p9qLYkxeUnP2RMZiNa hMeOD9nWNRTBHmrDbPlIzinNiKZ2VFY62hqLspZnpLLQlREy95Dapa+mSDNr9daRpu8K IiZw== X-Received: by 10.68.231.169 with SMTP id th9mr27502558pbc.113.1391888038666; Sat, 08 Feb 2014 11:33:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.76] (S0106d83062489ada.vs.shawcable.net. [70.71.102.48]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id cz3sm26157823pbc.9.2014.02.08.11.33.57 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 08 Feb 2014 11:33:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: Need to revert a CLI breaking change causing CB-5957 References: <145142AA-F4FA-49B2-8204-CD3867326D4F@devgeeks.org> <3c839288fec2487589427843a9d00ea1@BY2PR03MB377.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <52f3f198.87c5440a.6ec8.ffffe6f4@mx.google.com> From: purplecabbage Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (11B554a) In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <52f686a5.a3b2440a.6094.ffffd5ad@mx.google.com> Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2014 11:33:57 -0800 To: "dev@cordova.apache.org" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I am fine either way.=20 I agree that there is not a ton of value in the check for namespace, however= , it is part of the spec[1], and I believe all platforms are now honoring it= .=20 Cheers,=20 Jesse [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#algorithm-to-process-a-configuration-document-= 0 Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 8, 2014, at 8:45 AM, Andrew Grieve wrote: >=20 > Thanks Steve. >=20 > Wondering if we want to just leave the check out for good. Of all the > things we *don't* validate about our XML, erroring out on the namespace > wouldn't be at the top of my list for things to check (or at least make it= > a warning and not an error). >=20 >=20 >> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Steven Gill wrot= e: >>=20 >> It has been reverted! I originally published 3.3.1-0.4.0 and realized tha= t >> the platforms.js was pointing to RCs. For some reason, npm unpublish was >> not working for me. I updated the platform.js file and published >> 3.3.1-0.4.1. Everything seems to be working. >>=20 >> I have re-reverted the revert commit and everything on master is looking >> ready for the 3.4.0 tag when we are ready to release. >>=20 >>=20 >> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 3:49 PM, Olivier Bloch (MS OPEN TECH) < >> obloch@microsoft.com> wrote: >>=20 >>> I knew you would have jumped on the offer Jesse! >>> I have received few requests so far, which is fine as I was able to >> secure >>> only a limited number of devices (6 total). >>>=20 >>> Some of you have reached out to me directly, and those who have not yet >>> chimed in but would really benefit from an actual WP8 device to test >> their >>> Cordova work, feel free to contact me directly and I will do my best. >>>=20 >>> That said, I'd also like to bring to the attention of those of you who >> are >>> not familiar with WP8 dev tools, that the WP8 SDK comes with an emulator= >>> that allows for advanced testing without an actual device. Also, >> debugging >>> on a WP8 devices or side-loading apps for testing requires the SDK (and >> the >>> tools that come with it) to be installed too. >>>=20 >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: purplecabbage [mailto:purplecabbage@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, February 6, 2014 12:33 PM >>> To: dev@cordova.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: Need to revert a CLI breaking change causing CB-5957 >>>=20 >>> I would like to see us revert the one change and release 3.3.1-0.4.0 The= n >>> we can move forward with 3.4.0 with the commit back in. >>>=20 >>> Ps: can't believe no one has jumped at the free device offer of wp8 dev >>> devices. I have several, otherwise I would jump at Olivier's offer. :) >>>=20 >>> Sent from my iPhone >>>=20 >>>> On Feb 6, 2014, at 11:18 AM, Steven Gill >> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Now that we all agree to test more on windows, what shall we do about >>>> this issue? >>>>=20 >>>> Any thoughts on my suggestions to either revert back to (3.3.1-0.2.0) >>>> or revert the one commit and release 3.3.1-0.4.0? >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Olivier Bloch (MS OPEN TECH) < >>>> obloch@microsoft.com> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>>> I'd be more than happy to provision some WP8 dev devices. >>>>> Please let me know who would need one (I am not sure how many I can >>>>> get but will do my best) and didn't already get one at last phonegap >>>>> day =F0=9F=98=8A >>>>> Note that having actual devices for testing do not prevent from >>>>> having to install Visual Studio and the WP SDK. Also you can make the >>>>> emulator work within a VM. >>>>> I am working with Mike Sierra on getting the WP and Windows platforms >>>>> doc updated with instructions on how to get this to work. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Olivier >>>>>=20 >>>>> Sent from Windows Mail >>>>>=20 >>>>> From: Tommy-Carlos Williams >>>>> Sent: =E2=80=8EWednesday=E2=80=8E, =E2=80=8EFebruary=E2=80=8E =E2=80=8E= 5=E2=80=8E, =E2=80=8E2014 =E2=80=8E2=E2=80=8E:=E2=80=8E16=E2=80=8E =E2=80=8E= PM >>>>> To: dev@cordova.apache.org >>>>>=20 >>>>> Andrew, >>>>>=20 >>>>> Didn=E2=80=99t you get a phone at PhoneGap Day? >>>>>=20 >>>>> Were you too much of a =E2=80=9Cpresenter=E2=80=9D at the workshop to g= et one? ;) >>>>>=20 >>>>> If I ever get around to getting set up for WP8 I will try and help >>>>> test=E2=80=A6 will probably happen after I finish our Blackberry10 por= t. >>>>>=20 >>>>> - tommy >>>>>=20 >>>>>> On 6 Feb 2014, at 9:00 am, Andrew Grieve >> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Just to be clear - it's not enough to test on windows, this breaks >>>>>> only >>>>> for >>>>>> windows phone / win8 I think. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> That said, I've recently got set up with VMs and modern.ie. Is that >>>>> enough >>>>>> to test out Hello World on a WP emulator? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Michal Mocny >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> First off, Jesse I appreciate your respectable tone here, thank you.= >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> I agree, this is a sign that we generally don't test nearly enough >>>>>>> on windows, and should fix that. As someone who also reviewed the >>>>>>> work >>>>> Mark >>>>>>> was doing here, sorry this wasn't caught. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> I'll just add that I think the tests should have been run before >>>>>>> the *tooling release* (and even better, on a regular basis with CI >>>>>>> as >>>>> stated), >>>>>>> not necessarily before every patch to tip of tree lands. The >>>>>>> majority >>>>> of >>>>>>> changes do not affect specific platforms in subtle ways -- and >>>>>>> while we should absolutely have process to catch those that do -- >>>>>>> any process >>>>> that >>>>>>> involves manually testing in multiple configurations for every >>>>>>> single >>>>> patch >>>>>>> is prohibitive and I think unrealistic. >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> That change was committed a month ago -- how did we not catch it >>>>>>> before release? >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> To decrease the odds of this happening again, perhaps we need to >>>>>>> amend >>>>> the >>>>>>> steps for tooling release ( >>>>>>> http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/StepsForToolsRelease) to ensure >>>>>>> testing >>>>> on >>>>>>> all the platforms? >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> -Michal >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Jesse >>> wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> I would think it would be enough to just make sure that : >>>>>>>> 1. our tests catch the issue >>>>>>>> 2. the tests are run on windows/mac/linux before an npm publish >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> I agree Mark, the change is valuable, and I don't mean to single >>>>>>>> you >>>>>>> out. I >>>>>>>> am just concerned about how it made it to npm while obviously >>>>>>>> broken on windows devices. >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> @purplecabbage >>>>>>>> risingj.com >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Mark Koudritsky >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> Some CI for plugman and CLI on Windows would be extremely useful. >>>>>>>>> I >>>>>>> just >>>>>>>>> looked briefly at Travis-CI< >>>>>>>>> http://docs.travis-ci.com/user/getting-started/>, >>>>>>>>> but they only have Linux and OS >>>>>>>>> X. >>>>>>>>> Here is a random Windows based service I just found >>>>>>>>> http://www.appveyor.com/, didn't check if it's usable for our >>>>>>>>> case. Of course, this solution >>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>> only be for the host side tools, not for on-device tests which >>>>>>>>> are the >>>>>>>> most >>>>>>>>> important ones. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> That commit was part of this review >>>>>>>>> dealing with CB-4153 >>>>>>>>> . But >>>>>>> since >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> patch (probably prepared with git format-patch) contained two >>>>>>>>> separate commits and the second one didn't have a reference to >>>>>>>>> the bug, there >>>>> is >>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>> way to deduce that reference. The lesson for me is to add CB-xxxx:= >>>>>>> prefix >>>>>>>>> to each commit message in a series of related commits. The check >>>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>> added >>>>>>>>> to verity that config.xml does look like it's a Cordova related >>>>>>>>> config.xlmbecause with the new --link-to tag a random file named >>>>>>>>> config.xml by chance could be sitting in that www dir. >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Steven Gill >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> I'm going to agree with Jesse. That commit should not have made >>>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>> out >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> the wild without a platform tag increase. It is fine to go out >>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>> 3.4. >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Either we take the commit out and release the CLI again or we >>>>>>>>>> revert >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> CLI to two versions ago (3.3.1-0.2.0) and focus on getting 3.4.0.= >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN >>>>>>> TECH) < >>>>>>>>>> panarasi@microsoft.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Is there a way we could have a continuous integration process >>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> CLI >>>>>>>>>>> too ? >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>>>> From: Jesse [mailto:purplecabbage@gmail.com] >>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2014 9:54 AM >>>>>>>>>>> To: dev@cordova.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Need to revert a CLI breaking change causing CB-5957 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> WP8+7 and Windows8 users are currently unable to create new >>>>>>> projects >>>>>>>>>>> WP8+with >>>>>>>>>>> the CLI because this commit [1] has shipped. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Here is an issue raised on the subject [2] While I have >>>>>>>>>>> addressed >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> issue by adding the namespace to the tag in the >>>>>>>>>>> platform >>>>>>>>> create >>>>>>>>>>> templates for the affected platforms, until >>>>>>>>>>> 3.4.0 ships this will continue to break. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> I am unhappy about how this landed without discussion, or an >>>>>>>>>>> issue >>>>>>> in >>>>>>>>>>> jira, but ultimately this is just a symptom of the fact that >>>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>> enough >>>>>>>>>>> people test on WP7+8 and Windows 8. >>>>>>>>>>> Please try to test all platforms before landing changes to >>>>>>>> cordova-cli, >>>>>>>>>>> cordova-plugman and cordova-js or at least tread lightly and >>>>>>>>>>> try to >>>>>>>>> aware >>>>>>>>>>> of the impact outside of your pet platforms. I am always >>>>>>>>>>> available >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> discuss possible impacts. >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>>>>>> Jesse >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>> https://github.com/apache/cordova-cli/commit/837e8e367ae4feed4854f9ac >>>>> 95a8e906c893d818 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-5957 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>>>>>> @purplecabbage >>>>>>>>>>> risingj.com >>=20