incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian LeRoux...@brian.io>
Subject Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases
Date Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:59:53 GMT
would it be possible to drop 1.6 *before* we slip in 'one last change'

ppl are waiting on the ios 5.1 thing bigtime


2012/4/11 Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>:
> I'm finishing up the Great Jasmine Migration today so I will make sure to
> bump up the timeout value when I drop the commits.
>
> Will test on Ipod, G-Nexus and BB 9900 before dropping commits.
>
> On 4/11/12 8:23 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <simon.macdonald@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I've found that I need to increase the test timeout from 2000 to 5000 or
>>even 7000 in some cases. This generally gets rid of any test timeout
>>problems and leads to more consistent results for me.
>>
>>Simon Mac Donald
>>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
>>> also a test into mobile spec) today.
>>>
>>> We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally
>>>had
>>> more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>>>
>>> DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
>>> should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
>>> and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>>> DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>>>
>>> Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
>>>failing
>>> >consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about
>>>is
>>> >the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>>> >devices.
>>> >
>>> >Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>>> >Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>>> >Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>>> >Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>>> >
>>> >All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them,
>>>and
>>> >DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
>>>tagging
>>> >this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>>> >wondering
>>> >if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>>> >
>>> >Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in
>>>the
>>> >JS
>>> >earlier.
>>> >
>>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>>> >> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>>> >>
>>> >> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>>> >>
>>> >> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>>> >>
>>> >> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>>> >>appears to
>>> >> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>>> >>Nexus
>>> >> >and see if I get the same results.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that
on
>>>my
>>> >> >>Galaxy
>>> >> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact,
but only a
>>> >> >>>couple
>>> >> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy)
test
>>>that
>>> >> >>>saves,
>>> >> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not
sure.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bowserj@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what
most people
>>> >> >>>have.  I
>>> >> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release,
IMO.
>>>Why
>>> >> >>>did it
>>> >> >>> >jump up like that?
>>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework
commit on
>>> >>Android.
>>> >> >>>21
>>> >> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to
go, Jesse says
>>>the
>>> >> >>>same
>>> >> >>> >>for
>>> >> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with
a 1.6.0
>>> >>directory,
>>> >> >>> then
>>> >> >>> >> tag the docs.
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fil@adobe.com>
wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js,
we are just
>>> >> >>>picking
>>> >> >>> a
>>> >> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all
of us have been
>>> >>working
>>> >> >>> >>with
>>> >> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we
are not
>>>introducing
>>> >> >>> anything
>>> >> >>> >> >new.
>>> >> >>> >> >
>>> >> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the
common code in
>>> >> >>>cordova-js
>>> >> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms.
We have to
>>>stop
>>> >> >>> >>working
>>> >> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in
the spirit of this
>>> >> >>>project.
>>> >> >>> >>We
>>> >> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need
to be comfortable
>>> >> >>>testing
>>> >> >>> >>on
>>> >> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>>> >> >>> >> >
>>> >> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bowserj@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >
>>> >> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow
break Android, what
>>> >> >>>happens?
>>> >> >>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse
MacFadyen
>>> >> >>> >> >><purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> None.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>>> >> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron
<shazron@gmail.com>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> > None
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0..
Objections?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe
Bowser" <bowserj@gmail.com>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag
it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012
at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>>> >><fil@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes
in docs. Durrr.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48
AM, "Filip Maj" <fil@adobe.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually
Compass is not available in
>>>BlackBerry
>>> >> >>>before
>>> >> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain
why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to
file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to
update the docs to note this, and
>>>then, we
>>> >> >>> >>should be
>>> >> >>> >> >>> good
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44
AM, "Filip Maj" <fil@adobe.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing
tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>>> >> >>>callback
>>> >> >>> >>test
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when
I run the manual tests for accel they all
>>> >>check
>>> >> >>> >>out, so
>>> >> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing
tests might be a little blown up.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file
API looks fine, Drew.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to
me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>>> >>manual
>>> >> >>> >>tests
>>> >> >>> >> >>>for
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass
keep returning "[object object]" so there
>>> >>seems
>>> >> >>>to
>>> >> >>> >>be a
>>> >> >>> >> >>> little
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake
in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>>> >>into
>>> >> >>> that.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve
the compass issue IMO we're good to
>>> >>tag. We
>>> >> >>> >>pass
>>> >> >>> >> >>>on
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs
7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12
10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fil@adobe.com>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries
Jesse.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got
my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>>> >> >>>reproduce +
>>> >> >>> >>fix
>>> >> >>> >> >>>what
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing,
Drew.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12
10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>> >> >>> >> >>><purplecabbage@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush
>>>to
>>> >> >>>have a
>>> >> >>> >> >>>long
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
weekend.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
Sorry all.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
Cheers,
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
 Jesse
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>>> >> >>><bowserj@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put
>>>it
>>> >> >>>back
>>> >> >>> >>when
>>> >> >>> >> >>>we
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
this
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
sorted out!
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>>> >> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
>>>Seeing
>>> >> >>>some
>>> >> >>> >>odd
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure
>>>if
>>> >>it
>>> >> >>>is
>>> >> >>> >>my
>>> >> >>> >> >>>test
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
or
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
real bug.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>>> >> >>> >><b@brian.io>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
+1
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
OK so I pulled the latest master from
>>>cordova-js
>>> >> >>>and
>>> >> >>> >> >>> integrated
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
with
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>>> >>failing.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>>> >>1.7.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj"
>>><fil@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>>> >>have to
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
1.6.0
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
IMO
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>>> >><shazron@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
>>>reset
>>> >> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
steps
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
to
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
take
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
>>>think
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>>> >> >>> >> >>><fil@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm in the process of testing the latest
>>>BB
>>> >> >>>code so
>>> >> >>> >> >>>I'll
>>> >> >>> >> >>> let
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
you
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
guys
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
know
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
soon how we're looking there.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Is that the last thing need before we're
>>>all
>>> >> >>>good
>>> >> >>> to
>>> >> >>> >> >>>tag
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
release?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<simon.macdonald@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>>> >>tags. We
>>> >> >>> >> >>>haven't
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
released
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
any
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>>> >>shouldn't
>>> >> >>>be a
>>> >> >>> >> >>>problem
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
with
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
that.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Simon Mac Donald
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip
>>>Maj
>>> >><
>>> >> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>>> >> >>>cordova.js
>>> >> >>> >> >>>file is
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
error
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
prone
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>>> >>process
>>> >> >>>of
>>> >> >>> >> >>>checking
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
tag in
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
cordova-js, building, and copying the
>>>file
>>> >> >>>over
>>> >> >>> to
>>> >> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
platform
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
implementation? If this is the concern
>>>then
>>> >> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>>> >> >>> >> >>> the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
release
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
tool
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
should be set up to do that
>>>automatically.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js
>>>was
>>> >> >>>added
>>> >> >>> >>4
>>> >> >>> >> >>>days
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
but
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
1.6.0rc2
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>>> >>happened
>>> >> >>> >>there.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
In light of the tags not being ordered
>>> >> >>>properly
>>> >> >>> >>and
>>> >> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
seek
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
bug
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
creeping in, I propose, just for the
>>>1.6.0
>>> >> >>> >>release,
>>> >> >>> >> >>>that
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
>>>cordova-js.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>>> >>commit
>>> >> >>> >>(that
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
file
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
>>>least
>>> >>in
>>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>>right
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>>> >> >>> >>implementations
>>> >> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>>> >>say we
>>> >> >>> tag
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
1.6.1.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> <curtis.bryce@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
>>>into
>>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>>various
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
platform
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
repositories holds up the release.  It
>>>is
>>> >> >>>also
>>> >> >>> >>error
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
not
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
to
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
mention pushing to each repository
>>>every
>>> >>time
>>> >> >>> >>there
>>> >> >>> >> >>>is a
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
change
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
takes
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Any thoughts on having the release
>>>build
>>> >> >>>script
>>> >> >>> >> >>>handle
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
As
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
far
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
as during normal development and
>>>testing,
>>> >>we
>>> >> >>>are
>>> >> >>> >>all
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
building
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
cordova.js anyway, and keep current in
>>>our
>>> >> >>>own
>>> >> >>> >>ways.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>>> >> >>>MacDonald
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<simon.macdonald@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I just fixed what seems to be a zero
>>>day
>>> >> >>>bug in
>>> >> >>> >>our
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
implementation
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
of
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
FileWriter. If possible it would be
>>>good
>>> >>to
>>> >> >>>get
>>> >> >>> >> >>>this
>>> >> >>> >> >>> bug
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
fix
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
into
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
all
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
platform
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>

Mime
View raw message