incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Drew Walters <deedu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases
Date Tue, 10 Apr 2012 20:40:09 GMT
One thing I just remembered which is a gotcha with cordova-js.  The
version for Playbook comes from the cordova-js
lib/playbook/plugin/playbook/manager.js file.  So in order to update
Playbook version to 1.6.0 (its currently 1.6.0rc2) then cordova-js
would need updated.

Alternatively, I can just modify the file in the blackberry repo which
was copied from cordova-js.

Thoughts?

2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>:
> Should I tag blackberry or Drew, you got that?
>
> On 4/10/12 1:27 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
View raw message