One thing I just remembered which is a gotcha with cordova-js.  The
version for Playbook comes from the cordova-js
lib/playbook/plugin/playbook/manager.js file.  So in order to update
Playbook version to 1.6.0 (its currently 1.6.0rc2) then cordova-js
would need updated.

Alternatively, I can just modify the file in the blackberry repo which
was copied from cordova-js.

Thoughts?

2012/4/10 Filip Maj <[email protected]>:
> 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
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>

Reply via email to