incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases
Date Tue, 10 Apr 2012 20:44:37 GMT
Sorry, just had to re-tag 1.6.0

2012/4/10 Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>:
> iOS tests passing (10 failures - insignificant)
> iOS tagged 1.6.0
>
> 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>:
>> 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