incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon MacDonald <simon.macdon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases
Date Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:23:53 GMT
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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message