cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Soref <jso...@blackberry.com>
Subject Re: Independent platform release summary
Date Fri, 10 Oct 2014 18:10:36 GMT
Ok, 4.0

On 10/10/14, 2:08 PM, "Steven Gill" <stevengill97@gmail.com> wrote:

>Alright, 4.0.
>
>On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 4.0 and let's move on. It's just a number, and is a minor point in the
>>end.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Should we consider jumping to 13? You know... just prefix a 1 onto the
>> > existing number.
>> >
>> > ....
>> >
>> > 4.0 (or any other number) is great by me!
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH)
>><
>> > panarasi@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > 4.0 is also good. Should we tag and start a vote for that ?
>> > > Sorry for asking about vote again, but I want to ensure that the
>>issues
>> > > that Sergey fixed in the CLI/Lib are impacting some folks and I hope
>> this
>> > > release could help them fast.
>> > >
>> > > On 10/10/14, 10:17 AM, "Victor Sosa" <sosah.victor@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >lol... I like that :P
>> > > >
>> > > >2014-10-10 12:09 GMT-05:00 Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>:
>> > > >
>> > > >> On Oct 10, 2014 10:05 AM, "Brian LeRoux" <b@brian.io> wrote:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > OR we move to named releases externally.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Cordova MX === 4.0
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Cordova Mexico?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > On Oct 10, 2014 10:03 AM, "Michal Mocny" <mmocny@chromium.org>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > > 4 was also discussed as fine, and in isolation would have
>>been
>> our
>> > > >> choice
>> > > >> > > for sure -- but we worried that with the impending
>>"cordova-4.0"
>> > > >> releases,
>> > > >> > > it would confuse users and not mark a clear departure from
>> cadver.
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > The more I think about it though, the less important I think
>> that
>> > > >>worry
>> > > >> > > is.  Maybe 4.0 is fine.
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > (Apologies to Steve, who just wants to get this over with)
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > As is 4.
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > This is more of an outreach, marketing, blogging, tweeting,
>> etc
>> > > >> problem.
>> > > >> > > > Versions are for issue tracking not marketing. (Tho semver
>>and
>> > our
>> > > >> > > > respective $BIGCO's confuse that to their and our continued
>> > > >>strife.)
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > (All IMO of course, happy to follow the wisdom of the
>>crowd on
>> > > >>this
>> > > >> one.)
>> > > >> > > > On Oct 10, 2014 9:29 AM, "Michal Mocny"
>><mmocny@chromium.org>
>> > > >>wrote:
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > > 5 is also fine.
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Brian LeRoux
>><b@brian.io>
>> > > >>wrote:
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > I am against it. Its not going to achieve the goal of
>> > > >>alleviating
>> > > >> > > > > > confusion. People see the CLI as the version not the
>> > > >>platforms.
>> > > >> I'd
>> > > >> > > > > rather
>> > > >> > > > > > we went to 5 if anything.
>> > > >> > > > > > On Oct 9, 2014 3:56 PM, "Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN
>> > > >>TECH)" <
>> > > >> > > > > > panarasi@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > I meant tag and start the vote for the next release
>>:)
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > On 10/9/14, 3:01 PM, "Chuck Lantz" <
>> clantz@microsoft.com>
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >+1
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >-Chuck
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >-----Original Message-----
>> > > >> > > > > > > >From: Jesse [mailto:purplecabbage@gmail.com]
>> > > >> > > > > > > >Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 2:55 PM
>> > > >> > > > > > > >To: dev@cordova.apache.org
>> > > >> > > > > > > >Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >+1 to not voting ;) , it implies we will wait 72
>>hours
>> > > >>before
>> > > >> > > moving
>> > > >> > > > > on.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >How about if anyone is completely against 10.0.0
>>they
>> > > >>voice it
>> > > >> > > here,
>> > > >> > > > > in
>> > > >> > > > > > > >the next couple hours, otherwise we move forward.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >@purplecabbage
>> > > >> > > > > > > >risingj.com
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Steven Gill <
>> > > >> > > stevengill97@gmail.com
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> I don't think a vote is necessary. I'd hate to
>>see us
>> > > >>resort
>> > > >> to
>> > > >> > > > > voting
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> to solve problems. Voting should be a last resort
>>if
>> > > >> consensus
>> > > >> > > is
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> split. I don't see that in this scenario.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> I propose we bumb the version up to 10.0.0.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Parashuram
>>Narasimhan
>> > (MS
>> > > >> OPEN
>> > > >> > > > > TECH) <
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> panarasi@microsoft.com> wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > Lets start with a vote for 10.0.0 ? And if
>>someone
>> > > >>feels
>> > > >> > > > strongly
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > about calling it something the vote could be
>> > cancelled
>> > > >>!!
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > On 10/9/14, 2:41 PM, "Chuck Lantz"
>> > > >><clantz@microsoft.com>
>> > > >> > > > wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Yeah agreed - Vladimir squashed the bug and
>>what
>> was
>> > > >>at
>> > > >> once
>> > > >> > > > > point
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >to be called 3.7.0 has been mainly waiting on a
>> > > >>version
>> > > >> > > number.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Personally I am fine with 10.0.0 or 5.0.0 -
>>Either
>> > > >>send
>> > > >> the
>> > > >> > > > > message
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >that platform versions are divorced from the
>>CLI
>> > from
>> > > >>a
>> > > >> > > > > versioning
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >perspective (though behavior is still
>> predictable).
>> > > >>Leo
>> > > >> - I
>> > > >> > > > > think
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >at least out of the gate devs will likely
>>focus on
>> > the
>> > > >> CLI
>> > > >> > > > > version
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >as primary.  Basically today, the cadence
>>version
>> of
>> > > >>the
>> > > >> CLI
>> > > >> > > is
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >what people talk about.  Heck, Cordova
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >3.4.1 was 3.4.0 for all platforms but iOS.  The
>> main
>> > > >> message
>> > > >> > > is
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >that
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> when
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >you platform add android, you may see an npm
>>pull
>> > for
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >cordova-android@4.3.2 and that is expected.
>>It's
>> > > just
>> > > >> > > > > formalizing
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >the message and allows independent platform
>> rev'ing.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >-Chuck
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >-----Original Message-----
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >From: Steven Gill
>>[mailto:stevengill97@gmail.com]
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 2:13 PM
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >To: dev@cordova.apache.org
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Cc: Michal Mocny; Marcel Kinard
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Subject: Re: Independent platform release
>>summary
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >I think vladimir fixed the bug. We just need to
>> > > >>release
>> > > >> now.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Only thing holding back the release now is
>> consensus
>> > > >>on
>> > > >> the
>> > > >> > > > > version
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >of the cli. It seemed like most people were
>> leaning
>> > > >> toward
>> > > >> > > > > 10.0.0.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Should I move forward with that? I would just
>>have
>> > to
>> > > >> branch
>> > > >> > > +
>> > > >> > > > > pin
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >deps
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Leo the documentation version dropdown box
>>would
>> be
>> > > >>tied
>> > > >> to
>> > > >> > > cli
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>version.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >It still makes sense to copy over platform
>> > > >>documentation
>> > > >> into
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >platform repos and maybe copy it into docs
>>during
>> > > >> generation
>> > > >> > > > > time.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >As for plugin pinning, plugins have more to do
>> with
>> > > >> > > platforms.
>> > > >> > > > I
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> wouldn't
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >say they aren't tied to the cli at all. I
>> understand
>> > > >>your
>> > > >> > > point
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>though.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >So far, we haven't had any plugins that won't
>>work
>> > > >>with
>> > > >> > > > previous
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> versions
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >(As far as I know). We should really fix the
>> engine
>> > > >>stuff
>> > > >> for
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >plugins so we can keep track of what platforms
>> they
>> > > >>work
>> > > >> for.
>> > > >> > > > I'd
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >like us to give warnings to users to update
>>their
>> > > >>plugins
>> > > >> if
>> > > >> > > > > newer
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>versions are out.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Cordova info should also dump what versions of
>> > plugins
>> > > >> you
>> > > >> > > have
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> installed
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >if it doesn't already. In combination with
>>cordova
>> > > >>--save
>> > > >> &
>> > > >> > > > > cordova
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >--restore, we should be able to recommend a
>> workflow
>> > > >>that
>> > > >> is
>> > > >> > > > > easily
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >reproducible on any machine.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Chuck Lantz <
>> > > >> > > > > clantz@microsoft.com>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Okay - so - there's a pretty nasty CLI
>>blocker
>> bug
>> > > >> right
>> > > >> > > now.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Plugins with dependencies don't install (this
>> > > >>affects
>> > > >> all
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> platforms).  In my opinion, we need to get a
>>CLI
>> > > >> release
>> > > >> > > out
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> really soon.  Are we closed on this topic,
>>or do
>> > we
>> > > >> need to
>> > > >> > > > > look
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> at doing the old process to get this out the
>> door
>> > > >>while
>> > > >> we
>> > > >> > > > are
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>still talking?
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> There are also a series of other bugs in the
>> > > >>currently
>> > > >> > > tagged
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>"3.6.4"
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> platforms for Android, Windows, and Windows
>> Phone
>> > 8.
>> > > >> These
>> > > >> > > > can
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> be handled independently, but the CLI bug
>>can't.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-7670
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> -Chuck
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> -----Original Message-----
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> From: Treggiari, Leo
>> > > >>[mailto:leo.treggiari@intel.com]
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 12:23 PM
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> To: Michal Mocny
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Cc: Marcel Kinard; dev
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Subject: RE: Independent platform release
>> summary
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> I'll have to admit that this seems a bit
>>weird.
>> > > >>That
>> > > >> is,
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> independent versions of the CLI and
>>platforms,
>> > with
>> > > >>a
>> > > >> > > > "Cordova
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> release" named "something" - e.g. a date?
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Imagine a user wants to know whether the new
>> > > >>whitelist
>> > > >> > > entry
>> > > >> > > > in
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> config.xml is supported in the versions of
>>CLI
>> and
>> > > >> > > platforms
>> > > >> > > > > that
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> they have - assuming they understand the
>> > distinction
>> > > >> > > between
>> > > >> > > > > the
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> CLI and platforms to begin with.  They use
>>some
>> > > >>command
>> > > >> to
>> > > >> > > > list
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> the versions of the "things" (CLI and
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> platforms) they have installed.  They go to
>>the
>> > > >> individual
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> documentation of the "things" and try to
>>figure
>> it
>> > > >>out.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> The way the Cordova documentation works
>>today is
>> > > >>nice
>> > > >> with
>> > > >> > > > the
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> combo box where I can select a Cordova
>>version -
>> > > >>3.6.0,
>> > > >> > > > 3.5.0,
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> ...  What would the combo box contain in the
>>new
>> > > >> versioning
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> scheme and how many entries would there be?
>>Are
>> > the
>> > > >> > > answers
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>"dates" and "lots of dates"?
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Or would there be no Cordova version
>> documentation
>> > > >> other
>> > > >> > > than
>> > > >> > > > > an
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> explanation of how to get the list of
>>"things"
>> you
>> > > >> > > currently
>> > > >> > > > > have
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> and where to find the documentation on them.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> To "pin" or not to "pin.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Note that, to me, the pinning choice defines
>> what
>> > > >> happens
>> > > >> > > > when
>> > > >> > > > > I
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>use  "cordova {plugin | platform} add foo"
>>with
>> no
>> > > >> specific
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>version specified.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> I've understood, so far at least, that
>>plugins
>> are
>> > > >>not
>> > > >> > > pinned
>> > > >> > > > > (an
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> add always fetches something) and platforms
>>are
>> > > >>pinned
>> > > >> to a
>> > > >> > > > CLI
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> version (an add tells the CLI that I will be
>> using
>> > > >>that
>> > > >> > > > > platform
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> (already
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> installed) for this project).  Everything I
>>have
>> > > >>read
>> > > >> which
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> includes 1 book and the on-line project
>> > > >>documentation,
>> > > >> > > > suggest
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> that, even if not stating it explicitly.
>>E.g.
>> > > >>plugins
>> > > >> talk
>> > > >> > > > > about
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> "fetching" and platforms don't.  There is a
>>way
>> to
>> > > >> fetch a
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> specific version of platform support.  That's
>> good
>> > > >>and
>> > > >> if I
>> > > >> > > > do
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> that it is up to me to understand the
>> > compatibility
>> > > >>of
>> > > >> the
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>specific version I requested.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Is this true?  If so then the npm cordova
>> behavior
>> > > >> seems
>> > > >> > > > weird.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> That is, if I "npm install cordova" I get a
>>set
>> of
>> > > >> pinned
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> platforms.  If I "npm update cordova", I get
>>a
>> new
>> > > >>CLI
>> > > >> and
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> nothing else - i.e. not the platforms that
>>were
>> > > >>pinned
>> > > >> to
>> > > >> > > > that
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>version of the CLI?
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Should the plugin and platform 'pin'
>>behavior be
>> > the
>> > > >> same?
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Should both be pinned?  Some may find this
>> > > >>alternative
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>"blasphemous"
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> but the core plugin versions tested with a
>> version
>> > > >>of
>> > > >> the
>> > > >> > > CLI
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> could be pinned to the version of the CLI.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Should both not be pinned?  It would be more
>> > > >>consistent
>> > > >> and
>> > > >> > > > if
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> users are OK with plugins being unpinned, why
>> not
>> > > >> > > platforms?
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> But maybe plugins and platforms are
>>different.
>> > > >>Plugins
>> > > >> are
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> purely run-time code.  Platforms are
>>primarily
>> > > >>tooling
>> > > >> with
>> > > >> > > > > some
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> run-time
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> code.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Does that difference make the current pinning
>> > > >>behavior
>> > > >> the
>> > > >> > > > best
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> choice.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Maybe, but personally I would prefer both to
>>be
>> > > >>pinned
>> > > >> -
>> > > >> > > > i.e. I
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> install a version of Cordova, and until I
>>update
>> > it,
>> > > >> every
>> > > >> > > > > time I
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> add a platform or 'core' plugin, I get the
>>same
>> > > >>thing.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Leo
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> From: mmocny@google.com [mailto:
>> mmocny@google.com
>> > ]
>> > > >>On
>> > > >> > > Behalf
>> > > >> > > > > Of
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> Michal
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Mocny
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 1:47 PM
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> To: Treggiari, Leo
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Cc: Michal Mocny; Marcel Kinard; dev
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Subject: Re: Independent platform release
>> summary
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> With this direction, there is no single
>>number.
>> > > >>Users
>> > > >> > > should
>> > > >> > > > > not
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> functionally care about CLI version, so there
>> will
>> > > >>just
>> > > >> be
>> > > >> > > > the
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> platform versions that matter, really.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Downstreams can of course put labels on
>> > > >>combinations of
>> > > >> > > > > versions,
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> so "PhoneGap 4" may be Android 4, iOS 3.8,
>>and
>> > etc.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Treggiari,
>>Leo
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> <leo.treggiari@intel.com <mailto:
>> > > >> leo.treggiari@intel.com
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > Did I miss anything?
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> I don't think we closed on this (I had to
>>leave
>> > the
>> > > >> > > meeting a
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> little
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> early) but a remaining question is how to
>> version
>> > > >>what
>> > > >> we
>> > > >> > > > (and
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> users) call "Cordova".  Assuming a "Cordova"
>> > > >>version is
>> > > >> a
>> > > >> > > > point
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> in time collection of the latest CLI version
>>+
>> > > >>platform
>> > > >> > > > > versions
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> + plugin versions.  Is the Cordova version
>> semver
>> > > >> (using
>> > > >> > > what
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> algorithm with respect to its contained
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> components) or is that what you meant by
>> ""latest
>> > > >>as
>> > > >> of
>> > > >> > > Oct
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> 2014" or something".
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Thanks,
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Leo
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> -----Original Message-----
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> From: mmocny@google.com<mailto:
>> mmocny@google.com>
>> > > >> [mailto:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> mmocny@google.com<mailto:mmocny@google.com>]
>>On
>> > > >>Behalf
>> > > >> Of
>> > > >> > > > > Michal
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> Mocny
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 1:13 PM
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> To: Michal Mocny
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Cc: Marcel Kinard; dev
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Subject: Re: Independent platform release
>> summary
>> > > >> Thanks
>> > > >> > > > > everyone
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> for participation in what was a long and
>> grueling
>> > > >> > > discussion.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Summary of current proposal:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - Cad-ver is dead.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - Everything moves Sem-ver, with platforms
>> > > >>continuing
>> > > >> from
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> current versions and diverging over time.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - CLI potentially gets a significant version
>> bump
>> > to
>> > > >> > > showcase
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> this reset (to 5.0 or 10.0, not yet settled)
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - Pinning default platform versions *will*
>> > continue
>> > > >>for
>> > > >> the
>> > > >> > > > > time
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> being, but it will be trivial to override the
>> > > >>default.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - Platforms will have CLI <engine> tag
>> equivalent
>> > > >> (unclear
>> > > >> > > > yet
>> > > >> > > > > if
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> as node peerDependency or otherwise) so devs
>> will
>> > > >>know
>> > > >> when
>> > > >> > > > > they
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> need to upgrade/downgrade CLI for non-default
>> > > >>platform
>> > > >> > > > > versions.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - After a platform update, eventually CLI
>>will
>> > > >>release
>> > > >> to
>> > > >> > > > "pin"
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> the new default, and bump its PATCH/MINOR
>> version
>> > > >> (unless
>> > > >> > > CLI
>> > > >> > > > > had
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> a functional update at same time that
>>requires a
>> > > >>larger
>> > > >> > > > bump).
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - After you update CLI, your existing
>>projects
>> > don't
>> > > >> > > change &
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> platform upgrades remain explicit, but you
>>will
>> > now
>> > > >>get
>> > > >> > > > > warnings
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> if your installed platforms are older than
>>the
>> CLI
>> > > >> pinned
>> > > >> > > > > > versions.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - Event MAJOR changes to platforms are not
>>MAJOR
>> > > >> updates to
>> > > >> > > > the
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> CLI, unless there is an actual breaking
>>change
>> to
>> > > >>the
>> > > >> CLI
>> > > >> > > > tool
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> (i.e. new CLI will no longer work with the
>> > currently
>> > > >> > > > installed
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>platform).
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - Platform and CLI docs have to split out
>>and be
>> > > >> released &
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> versioned alongside each (like plugins).
>>Cross
>> > > >> references
>> > > >> > > > from
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> one to the other will only be needed in a few
>> > > >>places.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Note: The CLI-Platform compatibility story is
>> > > >> functionally
>> > > >> > > no
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>different than we have today.  If you upgrade
>> your
>> > > >>CLI
>> > > >> and
>> > > >> > > > there
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>is a  breaking change, you will have to
>>re-create
>> > > >>your
>> > > >> > > > projects
>> > > >> > > > > or
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>downgrade CLI again.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Now we plan to be more explicit about it and
>> offer
>> > > >> > > warnings.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Note: There is no concept of a "fancy-pants"
>> > release
>> > > >> other
>> > > >> > > > than
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> to say "latest as of Oct 2014" or something.
>> > > >>Platforms
>> > > >> > > don't
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> have a single common set of functionality, so
>> > CadVer
>> > > >> was
>> > > >> > > > > somewhat
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> misleading already in that sense.  We could
>> > > >>introduce a
>> > > >> > > > concept
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> of "API Level" for exec bridge or something
>>for
>> > use
>> > > >>by
>> > > >> > > > plugins,
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>but not sure that has value.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> What wasn't covered that came to mind after
>>the
>> > > >>fact:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> - When there is an update available for CLI,
>> > should
>> > > >>we
>> > > >> > > give a
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> warning to update? (this is useful, but isn't
>> > common
>> > > >> for
>> > > >> > > npm
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> modules.  I think we already do this from
>> plugman
>> > > >>when
>> > > >> you
>> > > >> > > > try
>> > > >> > > > > to
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>publish plugins?).
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> Did I miss anything?
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> -Michal
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Michal Mocny
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >><mmocny@chromium.org<mailto:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> mmocny@chromium.org>> wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > External Public link for those that just
>>want
>> to
>> > > >> > > > watch/chat:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > > https://plus.google.com/events/cm4l0vifcig920qkhpn5stqiet4
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > Hangout link to join the conversation:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >>
>> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/hoaevent/AP36tYcNwXEyet4Xv_23HiTl
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > 4I
>> K0jsM4NlmGy5kbLsPIW3SnOsUEIQ?authuser=0&hl=en
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > See you in 30 minutes.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Michal
>>Mocny
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> > <mmocny@chromium.org
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> <mailto:mmocny@chromium.org>> wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> +dev list again
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> Not everyone could make 1pm, not everyone
>> could
>> > > >>make
>> > > >> > > 2pm.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> While I don't think we need a full 2
>>hours,
>> I'm
>> > > >> hoping
>> > > >> > > to
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> start late and end early -- proving
>> opportunity
>> > > >> people
>> > > >> > > to
>> > > >> > > > > pop
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> in at either time and chime
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> in.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Marcel
>> Kinard
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> <cmarcelk@gmail.com<mailto:
>> cmarcelk@gmail.com
>> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >> wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> Is the expected duration 1 hour or 2
>>hours?
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> On Oct 8, 2014, at 10:56 AM, Michal Mocny
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >><mmocny@chromium.org<mailto:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> mmocny@chromium.org>> wrote:
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > So it looks like Today 1-3 EST or
>>Friday
>> 1-3
>> > > >>EST
>> > > >> are
>> > > >> > > > the
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > best
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>times.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> I'm
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > going to start the ball rolling to do
>>this
>> > > >>TODAY,
>> > > >> but
>> > > >> > > > if
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > that proves
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> too
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > short notices we'll move it to Friday.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > I'll email out links to hangout at
>>12:30
>> or
>> > > >>so,
>> > > >> and
>> > > >> > > I'm
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > hoping Steven
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> can
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > make it before 2pm since he's been most
>> > active
>> > > >> with
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > releases
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> recently.
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>> > -Michal
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> 
>>>-------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >-- To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> > > >> > > dev-unsubscribe@cordova.apache.org
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >For additional commands, e-mail:
>> > > >> dev-help@cordova.apache.org
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> 
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > - To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> > > >> dev-unsubscribe@cordova.apache.org
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail:
>> > > >> dev-help@cordova.apache.org
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >> >
>> > > >> > > > > > > >>
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> 
>>>>>?B�KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
>>>>>KC
>> > > >>>B�
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> 
>>>>>?�?[��X��ܚX�K??K[XZ[?�??]�][��X��ܚX�P?�ܙ?ݘK�\?X�?K�ܙ�B��܈?Y??]?[ۘ[??��
>>>>>[X
>> > > >>>[�
>> > > >> > > > > > > >?�??K[XZ[?�??]�Z?[???�ܙ?ݘK�\?X�?K�ܙ�B
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > > >
>> > > >> > > > >
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > >
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >--
>> > > >Victor Adrian Sosa Herrera
>> > > >IBM Software Engineer
>> > > >Guadalajara, Jalisco
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@cordova.apache.org
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@cordova.apache.org
>> > >
>> >
>>

Mime
View raw message