cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Plugin master branches
Date Wed, 23 Apr 2014 13:30:48 GMT
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
> > >> > >> > >>>>>
> > >> > >> > >>>>
> > >> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >> >
> > >> > >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
>

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