incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Filip Maj <...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases
Date Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:51:01 GMT
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