cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: What's Stopping us From Independent Platform Releases
Date Thu, 21 Aug 2014 00:54:20 GMT
I think we need to come down to the same conclusion as we did for plugins.
The documentation for each "component" meaning "cordova-ios",
"cordova-cli", "cordova-lib" needs to live with it's repo/code and version
together.

The remaining things can be left in cordova-docs that are independent of a
version of a component to an extent like security guide.

The Cordova Docs Website will need to have a new UX design to make sense of
where links point and somehow allow the user know what's the latest release
and the different components with each respective version.




On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 6:49 PM, Steven Gill <stevengill97@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the input Ray!
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, August 20, 2014, Ray Camden <raycamde@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> > I'll echo the issues I raised before. If the docs say that so and so is
> > supported, but it is for edge and not the current release, I think that
> > would be a huge mistake. I consider myself a pretty good Cordova dev and
> I
> > think even I would be confused as well. (I almost never run anything but
> > the released version so I can be sure what I blog, help folks with, etc,
> > matches the released version.)
> >
> > For either option, edge would be equivalent to latest released work. Even
> if you make changes on master for cordova-docs, it wouldn't be pushed to
> edge unless we were doing a docs release and the feature was being
> released. This is definitely something we need to keep track of. I don't
> think we have been bitten by this before though and don't imagine it being
> a big problem with either option and setting default docs to edge.
>
> Moving platform docs to platform repos and grabbing them at build time for
> docs would hopefully prevent this type of situation from arising.
>
>
>
> > Please, please, please do not do this.
> >
> > Why can't the docs simply be updated w/o updating the bits? Is that
> really
> > the case? If so, fix *that* bug.
> >
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by above? The reason we are needing
> to switch docs is because we are not doing cadence releases after 3.6.0. So
> either we have docs live with no version or we version it along side the
> CLI. Ex. CLI could be at version 5, cordova-firefox could be at version
> 3.7.0, cordova-android could be at version 4.2, etc. What would the
> versions of docs be?
>
>
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Steven Gill <stevengill97@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 3:59 PM
> > To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: What's Stopping us From Independent Platform Releases
> >
> > I still feel it would be a mistake to stop versioning our docs. It would
> > confuse our users.  It is a norm for projects to have docs associated to
> > specific versions.
> >
> > I think docs should be versioned when the cli gets released and
> > docs.cordova.io should always point to edge. This would address the
> > splashscreen docs not being live even though the feature has shipped.
> >
> > This use case can also handle us introducing breaking changes (ex:
> android
> > 4.0) and not have to keep older docs on edge.
> >
> > Annotating with "supported in android 3.6.0+" can start looking very ugly
> > over time if we have lots of annotations all over the place.
> >
> > As for previous versions, bugs most likely won't be fixed unless it is
> > something someone volunteers to do. I don't see much value in updating
> old
> > versions of docs. But it is worth still having them available for people
> > using those versions.
> >
> > I'd like to hear what others think about this?
> >
> > Both proposals are described at
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-7226
> >
>



-- 
Carlos Santana
<csantana23@gmail.com>

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