cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Piotr Zalewa <pzal...@mozilla.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Plugin master branches
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2014 17:58:15 GMT
I think we should have a sane contributing to Cordova page which would 
explain which branch does what.

I agree master is a default for a bleeding edge with tags representing 
current release.

Dnia Thu Apr 24 11:56:45 2014 Braden Shepherdson pisze:
> Standardizing the release tag names so that it can find the "latest" one is
> a can of worms I don't want us to open.
>
> The normal, standard flow is to install from the registry. If you're using
> the nonstandard git way, it's your job to pick the right branch, and master
> is the correct default. Choosing any other tag is much more surprising than
> using master when you're pulling from git with a bare URL.
>
> Users can already do "
> https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-inappbrowser#commitish" (or
> #:sub/dir, or #commitish:sub/dir). We support naming whatever branch, tag,
> or commit hash you like if you need something specific. master is the sane
> default.
>
> Braden
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:36 AM, purplecabbage <purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>>> On Apr 23, 2014, at 7:16 AM, Carlos Santana <csantana23@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 on using one branch "master"
>>>
>>> But, should we look into changing/enhancing the default behavior for
>> "git"
>>> plugin install implementation to:
>>>
>>> if just a git url "https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-inappbrowser
>> "
>>> it will query the tags/releases, and not pull latest commit and instead
>>> pull down latest release "r.0.4.0" from master.
>>>
>>> Or it's not worth? user can just do "
>>> https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-inappbrowser@r.0.4.0"
>>
>> Yes, this.
>>
>>>
>>> --Carlos
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Also, it will only "break" new plugin installs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:55 PM, Ian Clelland <iclelland@chromium.org
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> To be clear, this is just referring to Cordova CLI versions 3.0.0 -
>>>> 3.0.4,
>>>>> I think. By version 3.0.5, CLI had a dependency on plugman 0.10.0,
>> which
>>>>> included the "plugman-registry" branch. (We didn't push anything to the
>>>>> registry until 3.1 was released, but we made sure that the
>> infrastructure
>>>>> was ready a while before).
>>>>>
>>>>> If it is possible to use later versions of cordova-cli on a project
>> that
>>>>> uses Cordova 3.0 engines, then we should be clear that we're not
>> breaking
>>>>> Cordova 3.0 projects; just the oldest versions of the CLI, which
>>>> developers
>>>>> should be encouraged to upgrade in any case.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:00 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Didn't know about npm deprecate. Makes sense to me!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>> Can we deprecate version 3.0?
>>>>>>> https://www.npmjs.org/doc/cli/npm-deprecate.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Anis KADRI <anis.kadri@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 as well. This will break Cordova 3.0 though. Cordova versions
>=
>>>>> 3.1
>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> fine because they support registries. Cordova 3.0 only supports
git
>>>>> and
>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>> only fetch from master branches.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> +1++
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Steven Gill <
>>>>>> stevengill97@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> +1!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:02 AM, James Jong
<
>>>>> wjamesjong@gmail.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> +1 Making it easier and less confusing for
our new
>>>> contributors
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> good.
>>>>>>>>>>>> -James Jong
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 22, 2014, at 12:07 PM, Andrew Grieve
<
>>>>>> agrieve@chromium.org>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1! Certainly it's causing us a lot of
pain still. Moving
>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> releasing
>>>>>>>>>>>> off
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of master seems like it would work fine.
It's been working
>>>>> fine
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> CLI/plugman, and they move much faster.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Braden
Shepherdson <
>>>>>>>>>>>> braden@chromium.org>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We originally needed the plugin releases
to be on the
>>>> master
>>>>>>>> branch
>>>>>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there was no way to have CLI/Plugman
fetch from other
>>>>>> branches.
>>>>>>>>> That
>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>> no
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> longer the case. Further, you're
correct that the
>>>> registry's
>>>>>>>>> tarballs
>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the primary source now. Even if someone
does have a git
>>>>>>>> dependency
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> somewhere, they can specify a branch
(actually any ref) in
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> <dependency>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tag. Likewise the command line.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm all for moving development into
the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Braden
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:23 AM,
Bryan Higgins <
>>>>>>>>>>> bryan@bryanhiggins.net
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the registry has been
around for long enough that
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> vast
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> majority
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of users won't be installing
directly from git.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:44
AM, Ian Clelland <
>>>>>>>>>>> iclelland@chromium.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I totally agree that we should
do this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think that once the current
plugin release is
>>>> complete,
>>>>> I
>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>> set
>>>>>>>>>>> up
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branches so that the master
branch is for development,
>>>> and
>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>> can go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is it a requirement that
plugins be tagged in git for
>>>> npm
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> function?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thought that the plugins
were uploaded, zipped, to our
>>>>> couch
>>>>>>>>> server,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> each release, and that there
was no further
>>>> communication
>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> git
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repository? It shouldn't
be a problem to go back and
>>>> make
>>>>>> sure
>>>>>>>>>>> they're
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> properly tagged, but I'm
just wondering if it's still a
>>>>>>>>> necessity.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ian
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 9:27
PM, Jesse <
>>>>>>>> purplecabbage@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am seeing more and
more pull requests that aren't
>>>> easy
>>>>>>>> merges
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are starting their
work from the master branch,
>>>>> and
>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> dev.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We discussed *a long
time ago* that at some point, we
>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>> consider
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> master
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be the bleeding edge
of each plugin, and we could
>>>> then
>>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>> rid
>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dev branches.  The requirements
to make this possible
>>>>>>>> included,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> using a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> branch/tag for every
npm release of the plugin, and
>>>>> making
>>>>>>>> sure
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plugin
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependencies were correctly
mapped.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Has anyone given this
any more thought, and do we have
>>>>> any
>>>>>>>> idea
>>>>>>>>>>> when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will make the switch?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jesse
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> @purplecabbage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> risingj.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Carlos Santana
>>> <csantana23@gmail.com>
>>
>

--
Piotr Zalewa
Mozilla

Mime
View raw message