incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Filip Maj <...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: release 1.8.1
Date Tue, 12 Jun 2012 21:41:37 GMT
Yep that was my initial suggestion

On 6/12/12 2:32 PM, "Anis KADRI" <anis.kadri@gmail.com> wrote:

>So looks like we'll be tagging every platform to 1.8.1
>What about future releases ? if an issue strikes a specific platform (say
>iOS or Android) should we always tag all platforms to a new version number
>?
>I think we should do it since we distribute everything as a single
>package.
>I believe that tagging platforms separately only makes sense if we decide
>to distribute them as separate packages. Thoughts ?
>
>On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 12:00 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> iOS passes all tests and tagged 1.8.1
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > 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
View raw message