Shit my bad guys. I'll merge the two pull requests shortly and re-test using the "manual" tests that are present in callback-test.
If everything is cool then I'll retag. On 11-12-17 11:25 AM, "Drew Walters" <[email protected]> wrote: >I spent time the last two days setting up and testing on playbook >simulator >but was unable to get the camera API to work with or without my change. >Not >sure if the simulator has an issue or what but I have been unable to >properly test it on playbook. I stepped through the JavaScript and was >getting a null response in one of the internal blackberry webworks API. > >On Saturday, December 17, 2011, Michael Brooks <[email protected]> >wrote: >> Drew, since you know how to replicate the issues, can you apply these >>two >> pull requests, test on both platforms, and push to the master repo? >> >> If everything is fine, then we can retag callback-blackberry. >> >> Michael >> >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Drew Walters <[email protected]> >>wrote: >> >>> Fil, it doesn't look like my pull requests have been merged in. >>> Without the pull request with the capture and camera fix, the >>> BlackBerry code would be a regression. Not sure which tests you are >>> referring to, maybe the automated tests? Those tests must not >>> exercise the issues that exist. Namely, recording audio input, >>> reporting supported format types, specifying camera image size and >>> some others. >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:30 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > Alright cool I'll tag shortly and update on the "don¹t forget to tag" >>> > thread :P >>> > >>> > On 11-12-16 4:00 PM, "Dave Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > >>> >>+1 that sounds good to me. >>> >>On Dec 16, 2011 3:39 PM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> One more note on the PlayBook failing tests: pretty much all of the >>> >>> failing tests on PlayBook are related to the File API, which I seem >to >>> >>> recall the RIM calls explicitly telling me when they were working >>>on >>> >>>it... >>> >>> >>> >>> APIs such as GPS, Accel, Network, Notification, Contacts all seem >>>to >be >>> >>> working according to the tests. >>> >>> >>> >>> So, once more, in terms of release notes for 1.3 maybe we can say >>> "Basic >>> >>> Playbook support, minus the File API" ? >>> >>> >>> >>> On 11-12-16 3:34 PM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >Hey guys, >>> >>> > >>> >>> >Quick update on the state of the BB implementations for 1.3. >>> >>> > >>> >>> >1.3.0rc2 currently has approximately 95% of the PhoneGap API tests >>> >>>passing >>> >>> >on the smartphone, and just over half passing on the PlayBook >>> >>>simulator. I >>> >>> >don't have a working PlayBook device so rocking the sim - which >>>may >>> >>>not be >>> >>> >giving us a true reflection of the state of callback/cordova on >>>the >>> >>> >playbook. >>> >>> > >>> >>> >So, obviously some issues on the playbook that I am working >>>through >to >>> >>> >document and fix, but no regressions on the smartphone. >>> >>> > >>> >>> >Is that good to tag? I'll be documenting both smartphone and >playbook >>> >>> >issues. Marketing/release notes-wise, can we label 1.3.0 as having >>> >>>"basic >>> >>> >PlayBook support", or what do we do with respect to that? >>> >>> > >>> >>> >On 11-12-15 1:30 PM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > >>> >>> >>Drew, thanks for the clarification. I am going to double-check >>>both >>> >>> >>playbook and smartphone implementations and make sure we are >>>golden >>> >>> >>before >>> >>> >>tomorrow. >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>On 11-12-15 8:59 AM, "Drew Walters" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >>>Ok, I've submitted two pull requests which resolve numbers 3 >>>and 4 >>> >>>from >>> >>> >>>my list: >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>3. Restore camera and capture native functionality. >>> >>> >>> https://github.com/callback/callback-blackberry/pull/13 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>4. Delete duplicate blackberry.identity and blackberry.system >>> feature >>> >>> >>>ids in config.xml. >>> >>> >>>
