would it be possible to drop 1.6 *before* we slip in 'one last change' ppl are waiting on the ios 5.1 thing bigtime
2012/4/11 Filip Maj <[email protected]>: > I'm finishing up the Great Jasmine Migration today so I will make sure to > bump up the timeout value when I drop the commits. > > Will test on Ipod, G-Nexus and BB 9900 before dropping commits. > > On 4/11/12 8:23 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>I've found that I need to increase the test timeout from 2000 to 5000 or >>even 7000 in some cases. This generally gets rid of any test timeout >>problems and leads to more consistent results for me. >> >>Simon Mac Donald >>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald >> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:37 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 >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> >
