incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Brooks <mich...@michaelbrooks.ca>
Subject Re: Circular require()s
Date Fri, 31 Aug 2012 20:10:21 GMT
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
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message