cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: Cordova-Android 3.7.0 Blog Post
Date Tue, 03 Feb 2015 17:54:44 GMT
Did some pruning: https://github.com/cordova/apache-blog-posts/pull/30

On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:

> Its nice when people have a place to look up what changed when they notice
> a new version is out.  (Also, when we do a tools release and updated pinned
> platforms, we can point back to these posts).  Additionally, some of our
> users have come to this list asking for a blog post just recently, so its
> not completely unread..
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't really like how this is part of the release process at all, and
> the
> > only reason that I'm doing it is because we have to for some reason.  I
> > don't really think any of our users actually read this, and I really just
> > want to see this done so that it can't be used as an excuse to not ship
> > 4.0.x.  I think that the blog posts should be completely decoupled from
> the
> > release process, since my desire to see software released is completely
> > different from my desire to further condense release notes that I don't
> > think our users read.
> > On Mon Feb 02 2015 at 2:36:21 PM Josh Soref <jsoref@blackberry.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I sent a basic pull request.
> > >
> > > Offhand, that list should probably be shortened a bit more.
> > >
> > > Note that if something didn't change between the current release and
> > > 3.7.0, readers of the release announcement don't care. I can't figure
> out
> > > if some gradle changes were superceeded by others, or relate to
> different
> > > gradle env targets, if they were superceeded, the ones that don't apply
> > as
> > > of 3.7.0 should of course be dropped.
> > >
> > > Offhand, CB-4914 could probably be dropped; CB-8204 probably should be
> > > dropped; one instance of CB-8143 should probably be dropped (or not, if
> > > they're really different things/for different targets). CB-7410 should
> > > probably be dropped too.
> > >
> > > It's also helpful to group things by area.
> > >
> > >
> >
>

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