cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Plugin master branches
Date Tue, 22 Apr 2014 18:30:45 GMT
+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
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

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