incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jesse MacFadyen <purplecabb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: point release?
Date Thu, 27 Sep 2012 09:41:42 GMT
Not disagreeing.

Cheers,
  Jesse

Sent from my iPhone6

On 2012-09-27, at 2:31 AM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:

> One click builds are not just for CI! Hand rolling always error prone, and
> time consuming repatative business like that is a job for a robot. You then
> can focus on code, and others can see (and therefor improve upon) release
> packaging.
>
> Regardless of all those benefits we want to get to a CI future.
>
> (recommended reading on this, and more:
> http://pragprog.com/the-pragmatic-programmer)
>
> On Thursday, September 27, 2012, Jesse MacFadyen wrote:
>
>> I agree in a continuous integration scenario that makes sense, but we
>> are not there yet, and probably not soon either.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jesse
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone6
>>
>> On 2012-09-26, at 12:46 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>>
>>> Ya lets not ship a release with different ver numbers inside bundled.
>>> That's askin for (more) issue tracking hell. A release tag is just a one
>>> liner / automated. If it isn't: it should be. :p
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, September 26, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>
>>>> Link fail!
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-1531
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 9/26/12 12:22 PM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <purplecabbage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Address which for windows phone?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Jesse
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone6
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2012-09-26, at 12:01 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> O ya and we should possibly address this for windows phone 7 2.1.1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jesse are there any instructions anywhere on how to put together
those
>>>>>> starter packages?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/26/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <purplecabbage@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think we should allow some latitude in the point releases to
avoid
>>>>>>> the cascade of meaningless tags, and extra work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can we release 2.1.1 and just say that it contains 2.1.1 for
iOS and
>>>>>>> 2.1.0 for the rest? There are no API changes right?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Jesse
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone6
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 2012-09-26, at 9:54 AM, Michael Brooks <michael@michaelbrooks.ca>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As Becky mentioned, there's some big issues for iOS and our
user's
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> really like to see a quick patch.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd be in favour of tagging 2.1.1, where iOS tags master
and every
>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>> platform tags 2.1.1 on the same commit as 2.1.0.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd rather we point 2.1.1 at the 2.1 tag as suggested
for Android,
>>>>>>>>> continue work on 2.2 as planned, and ship a fresh release
for iOS
>>>>>>>>> wherein the big showstopper type problems exist.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I think we should just start cutting a 2.2.0 release.
 This change
>>>>>>>>>> log
>>>>>>>>>> looks too big for a point release and there's enough
improvements
>> to
>>>>>>>>> merit
>>>>>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> That being said, Cordova 2.1.0 still isn't officially
out, which
>>>>>>>>>> complicates things.  Any word on that?
>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 26, 2012 6:33 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <agrieve@chromium.org>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Another breakage that has been coming up a lot
is that the new
>> XHR
>>>>>>>>> bridge
>>>>>>>>>>> didn't work on non file:/// hosted paged. It's
fixed now, so
>> would
>>>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>> good
>>>>>>>>>>> to get it out ther

Mime
View raw message