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 15:15:16 GMT
I had to retag Android to 1.6.0. The .js file that Joe added into repo did
not have the fix for FileWriter.seek().

We really need to make this step part of the packaging of the release. If
we had a script that builds all the deliverables and then we go off and
test them would be better than all of us doing our ad hoc builds.

Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald


On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:

> Retagged Android 1.6.0
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> > Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
> >
> > On 4/10/12 12:37 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