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 2974CC053 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 21:38:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 87285 invoked by uid 500); 11 Jun 2012 21:38:27 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-callback-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 87254 invoked by uid 500); 11 Jun 2012 21:38:27 -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 87246 invoked by uid 99); 11 Jun 2012 21:38:26 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 21:38:26 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=FRT_ADOBE2,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of fil@adobe.com designates 64.18.1.23 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.18.1.23] (HELO exprod6og109.obsmtp.com) (64.18.1.23) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 21:38:19 +0000 Received: from outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com ([192.150.11.134]) by exprod6ob109.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKT9ZlEzOoJpkyE4PcyZVqzZOxsg36FOSw@postini.com; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:37:24 PDT Received: from inner-relay-4.eur.adobe.com (inner-relay-4.adobe.com [193.104.215.14]) by outbound-smtp-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id q5BLZ6J0010109 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:35:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nacas01.corp.adobe.com (nacas01.corp.adobe.com [10.8.189.99]) by inner-relay-4.eur.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with ESMTP id q5BLbHYs028782 for ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.95]) by nacas01.corp.adobe.com ([10.8.189.99]) with mapi; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:37:21 -0700 From: Filip Maj To: "callback-dev@incubator.apache.org" Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:38:05 -0700 Subject: Re: release 1.8.1 Thread-Topic: release 1.8.1 Thread-Index: Ac1IGmDpnIPTeFKFT9ekxy44MFS+sQ== Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.2.120421 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 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" 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 wrote: > >> +1 release 1.8.1 >> >> On 6/11/12 2:15 PM, "Brian LeRoux" 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! >> >> > > >--=20 >@purplecabbage >risingj.com