Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-callback-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-callback-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 67BDA9E78 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:05:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 71534 invoked by uid 500); 10 Apr 2012 18:05:38 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-callback-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 71491 invoked by uid 500); 10 Apr 2012 18:05:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact callback-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list callback-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 71483 invoked by uid 99); 10 Apr 2012 18:05:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:05:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of bowserj@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.175 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.175] (HELO mail-we0-f175.google.com) (74.125.82.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 18:05:33 +0000 Received: by wera1 with SMTP id a1so51555wer.6 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:05:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=s6PU67Su2TKxohvxVJ2nA6dG0SxyU4ql3epRfYcXQzo=; b=CsSpNUrqg4anWGp/VDDvNlVP1wtiIorwuE6eeKv2/RlDfGWRLv7jJzJqYESP30jdGK kTYaLhszTatcipPQCsFlTChvqKyJZTUBZ1atKPm1Xn38EWkaSauByBfjCvOdd4hjx4oi AjuarCFhqxvPI9xEJfflAw3fv5ejcTaH6siWpfEqdoOpddLTsceGsshZSbnvcykSwAc8 7PuIj3FpG5nFzbGANx12UY5QhNhNrEioI0qOPOoRRW7iHpUtE7CRszB9gwAJINReJONQ s8BTnxPVJiRTz5qDUtb+eX+Y1dV2Bwpj360snIQkJ9H5qh/J7Smnt8jxkkvJw2WSMhAi QUDA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.139.156 with SMTP id c28mr6780246wej.57.1334081112242; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:05:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.103.7 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:05:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2210248944328320909@unknownmsgid> References: <2210248944328320909@unknownmsgid> Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2012 11:05:12 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases From: Joe Bowser To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6dd98d1cbfb2704bd56f603 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --0016e6dd98d1cbfb2704bd56f603 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what happens? On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen wrote: > None. > Is none the new +1? > > Cheers, > Jesse > > Sent from my iPhone5 > > On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron wrote: > > > None > > > > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj : > >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections? > >> > >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" 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 wrote: > >>> > >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr. > >>>> > >>>> Tag? > >>>> > >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Ahhh=C5=A0 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" 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 t= he > >>>> 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 fo= r > >>>>>> 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" wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> No worries Jesse. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix wh= at > >>>>>>> you're > >>>>>>> seeing, Drew. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" > >>>> 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 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 tes= t > >>>> app > >>>>>>>>>> or > >>>>>>>>>> real bug. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux > >>>> 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" 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" 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 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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" > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 probl= em > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 checkin= g > >>>> 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 day= s > >>>> 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, tha= t > >>>> 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" > >>>> > >>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > --0016e6dd98d1cbfb2704bd56f603--