incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: release 1.8.1
Date Tue, 12 Jun 2012 18:23:54 GMT
Android Tagged.

All pre-1.9 work will happen on 1.8.1pre branch.

On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:

> Js tagged!
>
> On 6/12/12 10:53 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >OK, Waiting for the 1.8.1 tag on cordova-js then :P
> >
> >+1
> >
> >On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I'll reiterate, my vote is to just tag 1.8.1. In the other thread we
> >>did a
> >> full circle on possible release types :)
> >>
> >> On 6/12/12 10:42 AM, "Shazron" <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Not really sure where we are with this. Looks like there is friction
> >> >with updating *all* platforms to tag 1.8.1 (like the way we did
> >> >before). I'd say tag cordova-js 1.8.1 to the same tag as 1.8.0. Then
> >> >iOS updates and tags to 1.8.1. Source is fine - but binary
> >> >distribution, dunno. The reason cordova-js has to be tagged 1.8.1 is
> >> >because the cordova-js in a new project will be called
> >> >cordova-1.8.1.js, and if it is not tagged, it will be confusing.
> >> >
> >> >On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >> So, where are we with this?
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> The benefit of version numbers to track bugs which is pretty useful
> >>I
> >> >>> think! =) I've just assumed we'd want to synchronize the cordova-js
> >> >>> version number to the native code as a rule of thumb for sanity.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Is that assumption incorrect?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Jesse <purplecabbage@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>> > I agree with Anis, if I we are going through your proposal
Brian,
> >> >>>there
> >> >>> is
> >> >>> > little to no benefit over updating everything.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > In my estimation, the iOS fix will not require an update to
> >> >>>cordova-js,
> >> >>> > which may be our line in the sand. If cordova-js need to be
> >>rebuilt
> >> >>>to
> >> >>> > address an issue, then we will probably always have the full
> >>cascade
> >> >>>of
> >> >>> > rebuilds+retags+hoopla.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Anis KADRI <anis.kadri@gmail.com
> >
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> Is cordova-js updated in this particular case ? Because
if it is,
> >> >>>the
> >> >>> >> platforms that use it can just be tagged 1.8.1 and we
ship
> >> >>> >> phonegap-1.8.1.zip (just simpler).
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
> wrote:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > Well, here's the proposal again.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > 1. We ship a package and it is titled phonegap-1.8.x.zip
> >> >>> >> > 2. Inside that package we have files. Those files
are
> >>explicitly
> >> >>> >> > *-1.8.*.* (cordova-js would need a tag for 1.8.1
for projects
> >> >>>that use
> >> >>> >> > it..)
> >> >>> >> > 3. We update the download with PATCH updates as they
come on a
> >> >>> >> > platform by platform basis (as needed).
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > This could get messy given the shared dependency
of cordova-js.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Jesse
> >><purplecabbage@gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> > > I only added the patch level on the assumption
that it might
> >> >>>happen
> >> >>> >> again
> >> >>> >> > > before 1.9.
> >> >>> >> > > But I can live without it.
> >> >>> >> > >
> >> >>> >> > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Brian LeRoux
<b@brian.io>
> >> >>>wrote:
> >> >>> >> > >
> >> >>> >> > >> I'd like to propose we take jesses suggestion
but with the
> >> >>>tweak
> >> >>> that
> >> >>> >> > >> we do not add a new patch level. The downstream
distribution
> >> >>>would
> >> >>> >> > >> just read:
> >> >>> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> phonegap-1.8.x.zip
> >> >>> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> wherein the ios distrib would be based on
1.8.1 and all
> >>others
> >> >>> based
> >> >>> >> on
> >> >>> >> > >> 1.8.0
> >> >>> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> I feel this is maintainable and easiest
on implementors for
> >> >>> platforms
> >> >>> >> > >> that do not need to rock a patch tag. Thoughts?
> >> >>> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Joe Bowser
> >><bowserj@gmail.com
> >> >
> >> >>> >> wrote:
> >> >>> >> > >> > Android will not be merging 1.8.1 back
into master, since
> >>it
> >> >>> will be
> >> >>> >> > >> based
> >> >>> >> > >> > on 1.8.0 pre-CordovaWebView.
> >> >>> >> > >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Michael
Brooks <
> >> >>> >> > >> michael@michaelbrooks.ca>wrote:
> >> >>> >> > >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > Hmm.. Can we have multiple
tags in git pointing to the
> >> >>>same
> >> >>> >> commit?
> >> >>> >> > >> This
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > way we COULD tag all platforms,
but non-ios platforms'
> >> >>>1.8.1
> >> >>> just
> >> >>> >> > >> points
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > to the same commit as 1.8.0.
> >> >>> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> Yes, a tag is just a reference
to a SHA. However, we
> >>still
> >> >>>need
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> >> > >> update
> >> >>> >> > >> >> the VERSION file for each platform.
> >> >>> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> All platforms but iOS should be
able to branch off 1.8.0,
> >> >>>update
> >> >>> >> the
> >> >>> >> > >> code,
> >> >>> >> > >> >> and merge it back:
> >> >>> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> - `git checkout -b 1.8.0 new-release`
> >> >>> >> > >> >> - update the version to 1.8.1
> >> >>> >> > >> >> - `git commit -am "Version 1.8.1"
> >> >>> >> > >> >> - `git tag 1.8.1`
> >> >>> >> > >> >> - `git checkout master`
> >> >>> >> > >> >> - `git merge new-release`
> >> >>> >> > >> >> - `git branch -d new-release`
> >> >>> >> > >> >> - `git push origin`
> >> >>> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> Am I missing something?
> >> >>> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:44 PM,
Filip Maj
> >><fil@adobe.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > Hmm.. Can we have multiple
tags in git pointing to the
> >> >>>same
> >> >>> >> commit?
> >> >>> >> > >> This
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > way we COULD tag all platforms,
but non-ios platforms'
> >> >>>1.8.1
> >> >>> just
> >> >>> >> > >> points
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > to the same commit as 1.8.0.
> >> >>> >> > >> >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > On 6/11/12 2:41 PM, "Jesse"
<purplecabbage@gmail.com>
> >> >>>wrote:
> >> >>> >> > >> >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >I still think we should
serve the new updated+package
> >> >>> >> > distribution,
> >> >>> >> > >> just
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >not modify platforms that
do not have changes.
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >Call it a hotfix ...
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at
2:38 PM, Filip Maj
> >> >>><fil@adobe.com>
> >> >>> >> wrote:
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> The thing is that
the downstream distribution of
> >> >>>cordova
> >> >>> >> > (phonegap)
> >> >>> >> > >> >> gets
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> *a lot* of exposure/downloads
via a single archive
> >> >>> containing
> >> >>> >> > all
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>platform
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> implementations.
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> Tagging a 1.8.1 or
1.8.0.1 on a single platform and
> >> >>> blogging
> >> >>> >> > about
> >> >>> >> > >> it
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> would probably work
for the (small) user base that
> >>is
> >> >>> involved
> >> >>> >> > on
> >> >>> >> > >> the
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> issue tracker+mailing
list, and is comfortable with
> >> >>>git,
> >> >>> etc.
> >> >>> >> > >> However
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>for
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> the vast majority
of users these are all "hoops"
> >>they
> >> >>>have
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> >> go
> >> >>> >> > >> >> through
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> and, in light of
a latest point release crashing for
> >> >>>them
> >> >>> >> > already,
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> probably would just
add to their frustration.
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> If we want to be
up front and honest about the issue
> >> >>>and
> >> >>> how
> >> >>> >> to
> >> >>> >> > fix
> >> >>> >> > >> >> it,
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>as
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> well as provide as
simple a solution to people who
> >>may
> >> >>>have
> >> >>> >> > fallen
> >> >>> >> > >> >> into
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> the issue in the
first place, I am of the opinion we
> >> >>>should
> >> >>> >> tag
> >> >>> >> > >> 1.8.1
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> across the board,
blog about it _AND_ host up
> >>another
> >> >>>dist.
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> Would love to hear
what non-Adobe folks have to say
> >> >>>about
> >> >>> >> this.
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> On 6/11/12 2:30 PM,
"Jesse"
> >><purplecabbage@gmail.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Before I tip
my hand on a vote ...
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Is there any
chance of a middle ground here?
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Updating all
platforms to 1.8.1 for the benefit of
> >>one
> >> >>> >> platform
> >> >>> >> > >> seems
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>like
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >a lot of overhead
to address a change in one.
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Could we adopt
packaging a 1.8.0.1.zip which would
> >> >>>include
> >> >>> >> the
> >> >>> >> > >> >> updated
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>iOS
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >code, and iOS
code tags, but no changes to the
> >>other
> >> >>> >> > platforms? or
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >something similar?
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Of course this
would require adding a little
> >> >>> documentation to
> >> >>> >> > the
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>release,
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >to say what was
addressed, and what platforms were
> >> >>> changed,
> >> >>> >> but
> >> >>> >> > >> still
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >considerably
easier than the tag->domino effect we
> >> >>>have
> >> >>> now.
> >> >>> >> > IMO
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >On Mon, Jun 11,
2012 at 2:18 PM, Filip Maj
> >> >>><fil@adobe.com
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> > wrote:
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> +1 release
1.8.1
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 6/11/12
2:15 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <b@brian.io>
> >> >>>wrote:
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >So we
have a fairly big issue in iOS 1.8
> >>wherein a
> >> >>> >> PhoneGap
> >> >>> >> > >> app is
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >crashing
if the user swipes down the
> >>notification
> >> >>> centre
> >> >>> >> > while
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>in-app.
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >The
question is whether this is a bug big
> >>enough to
> >> >>> cut an
> >> >>> >> > >> 1.8.1
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >official
release for all platforms or if
> >>pointing
> >> >>> users to
> >> >>> >> > the
> >> >>> >> > >> >> minor
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >tag
is enough.
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >[+1]
release 1.8.1
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >[ -1]
do not release 1.8.1
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >I think
a tag should suffice but if implementors
> >> >>>have
> >> >>> no
> >> >>> >> > >> trouble
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >tagging
a release then we might as well save
> >> >>>Shaz/Becky
> >> >>> >> the
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >email/twitter
complaint!
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >--
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >@purplecabbage
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >risingj.com
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >--
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >@purplecabbage
> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >risingj.com
> >> >>> >> > >> >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >> >
> >> >>> >> > >> >>
> >> >>> >> > >>
> >> >>> >> > >
> >> >>> >> > >
> >> >>> >> > >
> >> >>> >> > > --
> >> >>> >> > > @purplecabbage
> >> >>> >> > > risingj.com
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > --
> >> >>> > @purplecabbage
> >> >>> > risingj.com
> >> >>>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message