> Note that the release schedule has some effect on how to best track > issues for a codebase. If we release weinre together with the rest of > Callback, then having it as a component of the CB project in Jira is > the right solution. Otherwise, if weinre would follow its own release > schedule, having a separate WEINRE project in Jira would be easier.
Having it live w/ its own versions and shipping at a slightly different cadence is fine by me. It certainly stands alone as a project and, once the dust settles in Nitobi/Adobe land, we'll be resourcing ppl on Weinre too so I hope we see some velocity increase there. (Lots of ideas like Aardwolf integration, NodeJS service rewire, CoffeeScript, etc keep coming up.) > In any case it might be a good idea to start Callback version numbers > at 2.0, especially if there'll be some renaming of APIs form PhoneGap > to Callback. This is a pretty good point. We didn't plan on shipping a 2.x until the summer timeframe but this is a rather major change to things. Interestingly, renamspacing to org.apache.callback.* isn't going to effect our user-base since we pollute the browser globals with awesome. >> - Still not completely clear if I can reship the weinre blob with it's >> WebKit-y bits and such from apache; I have some homework to do there. There >> will always be a lingering issue of LGPL code making it's way into the >> WebKit Web Inspector code I reship (today it's all BSD), which kinda throws >> a wrench into the gears. > > I guess we should be able to work out how to handle that. This is a really particular point of interest that seems to be discussed a bit on the legal-discuss mailing list archives. Should kick up a conversation there to see what the larger Apache community thinks. (I certainly can see many interpretations there.)
