cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Release 3.5.0
Date Fri, 02 May 2014 22:01:49 GMT
Releasing options for 3.5.0.

Option 1: Release like we always have.
* One zip containing zips of the platforms, js, docs, cli

Option 2: Break up platforms/tools/plugins
This is the option we are going towards with independent releases.
* Platforms go in the platforms directory
* Tools in the tools directory
* Plugins in the plugins directory
* where does cordova-js go? Tools directory? Since this will also be
released on npm, we need to release it on dist somewhere as well.
* do we need/want to release docs still? If yes, we should create a top
level docs directory
* cordova.io downloads section will need to reflect the change

You can see both option 1 & 2 at [1]

I personally like option 2 since this is the direction we are going towards
with independent releases. All the platforms will be released on npm once
the 3.5.0 vote concludes. I don't see much value in having one zip that has
zips of all of our platforms, cli, js + docs anymore.

[1] http://www.apache.org/dist/cordova/


On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Ian Clelland <iclelland@chromium.org> wrote:

> At this point, I have to agree. I found a couple more issues while sorting
> things out today that make me think it's not as obviously clean as it would
> have to be to be in 3.5.0.
>
> (The hope was originally that the public interface would be *exactly* the
> same, so it would be obvious that there were no compatibility issues, but
> it's a bit more complicated than that now :( )
>
> For now, it can stay on a branch, and we can experiment with it until it's
> ready for merging. No need to hold up the rest of the cadence train for one
> feature.
>
> Ian
>
>
> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Steven Gill <stevengill97@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree with Marcel. We should give it more time and bump it to a future
> > release.
> > On May 1, 2014 8:42 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cmarcelk@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Given the recent thread on "customer pain points", I'd suggest that
> this
> > > capability be released when there is confidence that it works well, and
> > any
> > > breakages are understood and minimized. Reading the other threads,
> sounds
> > > like it's not quite there yet.
> > >
> > > On May 1, 2014, at 10:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Should we just be cautious and bump to 3.6, or do we give you till
> > > Monday?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Ian Clelland <iclelland@chromium.org
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Currently, I think that pluggable webview is a non-starter for
> 3.5.0;
> > > >> there's an unfortunate backwards-incompatibility introduced by
> > > abstracting
> > > >> CordovaWebView from a class into an interface.
> > > >>
> > > >> /me swears at Java for not having either multiple inheritance or
> > > non-static
> > > >> fields on interfaces...
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm playing with one possible solution to this today; if it works,
> > then
> > > we
> > > >> might be able to get this in to 3.5, but I'm not 100% confident yet.
> > > I'll
> > > >> have to let you know later today.
> > >
> > >
> >
>

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