Should I tag blackberry or Drew, you got that? On 4/10/12 1:27 PM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote:
>Retagged Android 1.6.0 > >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0 >> >> On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and >> >also a test into mobile spec) today. >> > >> >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally >>had >> >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line. >> > >> >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That >>certainly >> >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord >> >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine. >> >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2. >> > >> >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on! >> > >> >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least >>failing >> >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing. What I do care >>about is >> >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android >> >>devices. >> >> >> >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures >> >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures >> >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures >> >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures >> >> >> >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them, >>and >> >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out. I'm OK with >>tagging >> >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm >> >>wondering >> >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well. >> >> >> >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in >>the >> >>JS >> >>earlier. >> >> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact >> >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one. >> >>> >> >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue. >> >>> >> >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged. >> >>> >> >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II. Testing >> >>>appears to >> >>> >be completely inconsistent. I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy >> >>>Nexus >> >>> >and see if I get the same results. >> >>> > >> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> >> >>>wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread. The thing is that on >>my >> >>> >>Galaxy >> >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> >>wrote: >> >>> >> >> >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only >>a >> >>> >>>couple >> >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test >>that >> >>> >>>saves, >> >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most >>people >> >>> >>>have. I >> >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO. >>Why >> >>> >>>did it >> >>> >>> >jump up like that? >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> > >> >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on >> >>>Android. >> >>> >>>21 >> >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus. >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says >>the >> >>> >>>same >> >>> >>> >>for >> >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good. >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 >> >>>directory, >> >>> >>> then >> >>> >>> >> tag the docs. >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are >>just >> >>> >>>picking >> >>> >>> a >> >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been >> >>>working >> >>> >>> >>with >> >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not >>introducing >> >>> >>> anything >> >>> >>> >> >new. >> >>> >>> >> > >> >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in >> >>> >>>cordova-js >> >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to >> >>>stop >> >>> >>> >>working >> >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of >>this >> >>> >>>project. >> >>> >>> >>We >> >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be >>comfortable >> >>> >>>testing >> >>> >>> >>on >> >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms. >> >>> >>> >> > >> >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> > >> >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what >> >>> >>>happens? >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen >> >>> >>> >> >><[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>> None. >> >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1? >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers, >> >>> >>> >> >>> Jesse >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5 >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <[email protected]> >> >>>wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> > None >> >>> >>> >> >>> > >> >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <[email protected]>: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections? >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> >> >>>wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3? >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj >> >>><[email protected]> >> >>> >>> >>wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag? >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in >>BlackBerry >> >>> >>>before >> >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :) >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and >>then, >> >>>we >> >>> >>> >>should be >> >>> >>> >> >>> good >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya? >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> >> >>>wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel >> >>> >>>callback >> >>> >>> >>test >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all >> >>>check >> >>> >>> >>out, so >> >>> >>> >> >>>the >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37 >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The >> >>>manual >> >>> >>> >>tests >> >>> >>> >> >>>for >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there >> >>>seems >> >>> >>>to >> >>> >>> >>be a >> >>> >>> >> >>> little >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking >> >>>into >> >>> >>> that. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to >> >>>tag. We >> >>> >>> >>pass >> >>> >>> >> >>>on >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0). >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <[email protected]> >> >>>wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to >> >>> >>>reproduce + >> >>> >>> >>fix >> >>> >>> >> >>>what >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" >> >>> >>> >> >>><[email protected]> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my >>rush to >> >>> >>>have a >> >>> >>> >> >>>long >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers, >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Jesse >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5 >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser >> >>> >>><[email protected]> >> >>> >>> >> >>>wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android. I'll >>put it >> >>> >>>back >> >>> >>> >>when >> >>> >>> >> >>>we >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out! >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters < >> >>> >>> >> >>> [email protected]> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB. >> >>>Seeing >> >>> >>>some >> >>> >>> >>odd >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6. Not >>sure if >> >>>it >> >>> >>>is >> >>> >>> >>my >> >>> >>> >> >>>test >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux >> >>> >>> >><[email protected]> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1 >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from >> >>>cordova-js >> >>> >>>and >> >>> >>> >> >>> integrated >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests >> >>>failing. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in >> >>>1.7. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" >><[email protected] >> > >> >>> >>> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just >> >>>have to >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0 >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" >> >>><[email protected]> >> >>> >>> >>wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag >> >>>reset >> >>> >>> >> >>>discussion? >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I >>think >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj >> >>> >>> >> >>><[email protected]> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest >>BB >> >>> >>>code so >> >>> >>> >> >>>I'll >> >>> >>> >> >>> let >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there. >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're >>all >> >>> >>>good >> >>> >>> to >> >>> >>> >> >>>tag >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release? >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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 >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> > >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> > >> >>
