incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Circular require()s
Date Fri, 31 Aug 2012 21:24:42 GMT
Thanks Fil, re-testing now.

On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
> I've reverted the change and re-tagged JS.
>
> I would HIGHLY recommend rebuilding the JS and re-testing everything on
> all platforms just in case.
>
> On 8/31/12 1:10 PM, "Michael Brooks" <michael@michaelbrooks.ca> wrote:
>
>>If the circular dependency issue is isolated to one or more commits, then
>>you can revert those commits (basically an inverted cherry-pick - undoing
>>the particular commit).
>>
>>On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Can we cherry-pick the circular require commit out and run through the
>>> motions? There are a lot of good commits that we should include ethat
>>> follow it. Any volunteers?
>>>
>>> On 8/31/12 12:59 PM, "Gord Tanner" <gord@tinyhippos.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Know what
>>> >
>>> >+1 to rolling it back.
>>> >
>>> >Way to many things to test at this point to ensure we don't miss
>>>anything.
>>> >
>>> >On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 3:56 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
>>> >wrote:
>>> >> These are usually easy to fix by moving one of the require()s one
>>> >>nesting
>>> >> deeper.
>>> >>
>>> >> That said, it might be worth just rolling the CL back for now and
>>>then
>>> >> rolling it forward after the tagging.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Gord is this a showstopper?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 8/31/12 11:58 AM, "Shazron" <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >So, what does this mean. Should all platforms hold?
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
wrote:
>>> >>> >> Oh balls. Just tagged 2.1.0rc2
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> On 8/31/12 11:35 AM, "Gord Tanner" <gtanner@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>>This is currently breaking tizen and File API's
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>Should we remove this and push to 2.2 to give people
time to
>>>clean
>>> >>>this
>>> >>> >>>up?
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Andrew Grieve
>>> >>><agrieve@chromium.org>
>>> >>> >>>wrote:
>>> >>> >>>> Done and done.
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cordova-js.git;a=co
>>> >>> >>>>mm
>>> >>> >>>>it;h=188232f42e60745c961363638560ad3c41b6590c
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Patrick Mueller
>>> >>><pmuellr@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>>>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Andrew Grieve
>>> >>><agrieve@google.com>
>>> >>> >>>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>> > ...
>>> >>> >>>>> > I think these restrictions are too hard
to get right, and
>>>that
>>> >>>we
>>> >>> >>>>>should
>>> >>> >>>>> > just make require cycles an error. Objections?
>>> >>> >>>>> >
>>> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>> +1, I think this should be containable for
us.
>>> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>>>> --
>>> >>> >>>>> Patrick Mueller
>>> >>> >>>>> http://muellerware.org
>>> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >--
>>> >Gord Tanner
>>> >Senior Developer / Code Poet
>>> >tinyHippos Inc.
>>> >@tinyhippos
>>>
>>>
>

Mime
View raw message