I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that. So I agree with Fil's steps.
Simon Mac Donald http://hi.im/simonmacdonald On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > I like the general process Joe lays out. > > I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone > though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in > cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform > implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release tool > should be set up to do that automatically. > > For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but 1.6.0rc2 > was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there. > > In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug > creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we: > > 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js. > 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the file > seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order > 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms > 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0 > > If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1. > > On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform >>repositories holds up the release. It is also error prone - not to >>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes >>a lot of time & can get out of of sync. >> >>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this? As far >>as during normal development and testing, we are all building >>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways. >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald >><[email protected]> wrote: >>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation of >>>the >>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into all >>>the >>> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code. >>> >>> Simon Mac Donald >>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> iOS tagged 1.6.0 >>>> I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen >>>><[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0 >>>> > >>>> > Cheers, >>>> > Jesse >>>> > >>>> > Sent from my iPhone5 >>>> > >>>> > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0. >>>> >> >>>> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen < >>>> [email protected]>wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life! >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Cheers, >>>> >>> Jesse >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone5 >>>> >>> >>>> >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> Tag now? I can tag >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald >>>> >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Hey >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be >>>>tagged >>>> 1.6, >>>> >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, >>>>and >>>> >>> since >>>> >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to >>>> Cordova >>>> >>> JS, >>>> >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2 >>>> >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS. >>>> >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6 >>>> >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work >>>> through >>>> >>> the >>>> >>>>>> bugs. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken >>>>and the >>>> >>> egg >>>> >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us >>>>up a >>>> >>> bit. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Joe >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>> >
