Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-callback-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-callback-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AE5C29DC6 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 19:30:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 60652 invoked by uid 500); 27 Feb 2012 19:30:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-callback-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 60632 invoked by uid 500); 27 Feb 2012 19:30:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact callback-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list callback-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 60624 invoked by uid 99); 27 Feb 2012 19:30:25 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 19:30:25 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of fil@adobe.com designates 64.18.1.181 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.18.1.181] (HELO exprod6og101.obsmtp.com) (64.18.1.181) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 19:30:15 +0000 Received: from outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com ([193.104.215.16]) by exprod6ob101.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT0vZr4sYIS87YtTUAB8ysY50nupS9fBF@postini.com; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:29:54 PST Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (ms-exchange.macromedia.com [153.32.1.51]) by outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id q1RJTnN3006027 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:29:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from nahub02.corp.adobe.com (nahub02.corp.adobe.com [10.8.189.98]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id q1RJTnMM002414 for ; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:29:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.95]) by nahub02.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.98]) with mapi; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:29:49 -0800 From: Filip Maj To: "callback-dev@incubator.apache.org" Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:29:47 -0800 Subject: Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5 Thread-Topic: Concerns about releasing 1.5 Thread-Index: Acz1hisYDA0bnDc0Qb6ztnvMjaMp5g== Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.14.0.111121 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 12-02-24 2:49 PM, "Becky Gibson" wrote: >Mobile-spec has had some changes to accomodate the unified-js - Thus there >will be errors on platforms that have not implemented unified js. Plus, >we >are still finding bugs in unified JS on the "completed" platforms. I believe there was only one change to mobile-spec you are mentioning here Becky and that is the change from 'ToURI' to 'ToURL' for the File object - which simply returns FileObject.fullPath. Very easy to revert if you think this is a show-stopper. > >My issue is that by releasing unified-js over different releases we are >making it much harder on our users! IMHO we haven't adequately warned >users about all the upcoming changes. How are we making it harder? Mobile-spec passes (passes better with cordova-js on Android than previous implementation). Our users still just require a JS file - end result is the same. API still works. The only concerning thing for me are the file system root / pathing issues that came up on Android - which we can also solve/revert pretty quickly to what we had before, and work out the cross-platform consistency of pathing and file system resolution for 1.6.