cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Plugin master branches
Date Thu, 24 Apr 2014 20:11:43 GMT
A good reference would be:
https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/committer-workflow.md

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Piotr Zalewa <pzalewa@mozilla.com> wrote:
> 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