I'll reiterate, my vote is to just tag 1.8.1. In the other thread we did a full circle on possible release types :)
On 6/12/12 10:42 AM, "Shazron" <[email protected]> wrote: >Not really sure where we are with this. Looks like there is friction >with updating *all* platforms to tag 1.8.1 (like the way we did >before). I'd say tag cordova-js 1.8.1 to the same tag as 1.8.0. Then >iOS updates and tags to 1.8.1. Source is fine - but binary >distribution, dunno. The reason cordova-js has to be tagged 1.8.1 is >because the cordova-js in a new project will be called >cordova-1.8.1.js, and if it is not tagged, it will be confusing. > >On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: >> So, where are we with this? >> >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> The benefit of version numbers to track bugs which is pretty useful I >>> think! =) I've just assumed we'd want to synchronize the cordova-js >>> version number to the native code as a rule of thumb for sanity. >>> >>> Is that assumption incorrect? >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Jesse <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > I agree with Anis, if I we are going through your proposal Brian, >>>there >>> is >>> > little to no benefit over updating everything. >>> > >>> > In my estimation, the iOS fix will not require an update to >>>cordova-js, >>> > which may be our line in the sand. If cordova-js need to be rebuilt >>>to >>> > address an issue, then we will probably always have the full cascade >>>of >>> > rebuilds+retags+hoopla. >>> > >>> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Anis KADRI <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> Is cordova-js updated in this particular case ? Because if it is, >>>the >>> >> platforms that use it can just be tagged 1.8.1 and we ship >>> >> phonegap-1.8.1.zip (just simpler). >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> > Well, here's the proposal again. >>> >> > >>> >> > 1. We ship a package and it is titled phonegap-1.8.x.zip >>> >> > 2. Inside that package we have files. Those files are explicitly >>> >> > *-1.8.*.* (cordova-js would need a tag for 1.8.1 for projects >>>that use >>> >> > it..) >>> >> > 3. We update the download with PATCH updates as they come on a >>> >> > platform by platform basis (as needed). >>> >> > >>> >> > This could get messy given the shared dependency of cordova-js. >>> >> > >>> >> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Jesse <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> > > I only added the patch level on the assumption that it might >>>happen >>> >> again >>> >> > > before 1.9. >>> >> > > But I can live without it. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> >>>wrote: >>> >> > > >>> >> > >> I'd like to propose we take jesses suggestion but with the >>>tweak >>> that >>> >> > >> we do not add a new patch level. The downstream distribution >>>would >>> >> > >> just read: >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> phonegap-1.8.x.zip >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> wherein the ios distrib would be based on 1.8.1 and all others >>> based >>> >> on >>> >> > >> 1.8.0 >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> I feel this is maintainable and easiest on implementors for >>> platforms >>> >> > >> that do not need to rock a patch tag. Thoughts? >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > >> > Android will not be merging 1.8.1 back into master, since it >>> will be >>> >> > >> based >>> >> > >> > on 1.8.0 pre-CordovaWebView. >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Michael Brooks < >>> >> > >> [email protected]>wrote: >>> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > Hmm.. Can we have multiple tags in git pointing to the >>>same >>> >> commit? >>> >> > >> This >>> >> > >> >> > way we COULD tag all platforms, but non-ios platforms' >>>1.8.1 >>> just >>> >> > >> points >>> >> > >> >> > to the same commit as 1.8.0. >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> Yes, a tag is just a reference to a SHA. However, we still >>>need >>> to >>> >> > >> update >>> >> > >> >> the VERSION file for each platform. >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> All platforms but iOS should be able to branch off 1.8.0, >>>update >>> >> the >>> >> > >> code, >>> >> > >> >> and merge it back: >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> - `git checkout -b 1.8.0 new-release` >>> >> > >> >> - update the version to 1.8.1 >>> >> > >> >> - `git commit -am "Version 1.8.1" >>> >> > >> >> - `git tag 1.8.1` >>> >> > >> >> - `git checkout master` >>> >> > >> >> - `git merge new-release` >>> >> > >> >> - `git branch -d new-release` >>> >> > >> >> - `git push origin` >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> Am I missing something? >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> > Hmm.. Can we have multiple tags in git pointing to the >>>same >>> >> commit? >>> >> > >> This >>> >> > >> >> > way we COULD tag all platforms, but non-ios platforms' >>>1.8.1 >>> just >>> >> > >> points >>> >> > >> >> > to the same commit as 1.8.0. >>> >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > On 6/11/12 2:41 PM, "Jesse" <[email protected]> >>>wrote: >>> >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >I still think we should serve the new updated+package >>> >> > distribution, >>> >> > >> just >>> >> > >> >> > >not modify platforms that do not have changes. >>> >> > >> >> > >Call it a hotfix ... >>> >> > >> >> > > >>> >> > >> >> > >On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Filip Maj >>><[email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > >> >> > > >>> >> > >> >> > >> The thing is that the downstream distribution of >>>cordova >>> >> > (phonegap) >>> >> > >> >> gets >>> >> > >> >> > >> *a lot* of exposure/downloads via a single archive >>> containing >>> >> > all >>> >> > >> >> > >>platform >>> >> > >> >> > >> implementations. >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> Tagging a 1.8.1 or 1.8.0.1 on a single platform and >>> blogging >>> >> > about >>> >> > >> it >>> >> > >> >> > >> would probably work for the (small) user base that is >>> involved >>> >> > on >>> >> > >> the >>> >> > >> >> > >> issue tracker+mailing list, and is comfortable with >>>git, >>> etc. >>> >> > >> However >>> >> > >> >> > >>for >>> >> > >> >> > >> the vast majority of users these are all "hoops" they >>>have >>> to >>> >> go >>> >> > >> >> through >>> >> > >> >> > >> and, in light of a latest point release crashing for >>>them >>> >> > already, >>> >> > >> >> > >> probably would just add to their frustration. >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> If we want to be up front and honest about the issue >>>and >>> how >>> >> to >>> >> > fix >>> >> > >> >> it, >>> >> > >> >> > >>as >>> >> > >> >> > >> well as provide as simple a solution to people who may >>>have >>> >> > fallen >>> >> > >> >> into >>> >> > >> >> > >> the issue in the first place, I am of the opinion we >>>should >>> >> tag >>> >> > >> 1.8.1 >>> >> > >> >> > >> across the board, blog about it _AND_ host up another >>>dist. >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> Would love to hear what non-Adobe folks have to say >>>about >>> >> this. >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> On 6/11/12 2:30 PM, "Jesse" <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Before I tip my hand on a vote ... >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Is there any chance of a middle ground here? >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Updating all platforms to 1.8.1 for the benefit of one >>> >> platform >>> >> > >> seems >>> >> > >> >> > >>like >>> >> > >> >> > >> >a lot of overhead to address a change in one. >>> >> > >> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Could we adopt packaging a 1.8.0.1.zip which would >>>include >>> >> the >>> >> > >> >> updated >>> >> > >> >> > >>iOS >>> >> > >> >> > >> >code, and iOS code tags, but no changes to the other >>> >> > platforms? or >>> >> > >> >> > >> >something similar? >>> >> > >> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >Of course this would require adding a little >>> documentation to >>> >> > the >>> >> > >> >> > >>release, >>> >> > >> >> > >> >to say what was addressed, and what platforms were >>> changed, >>> >> but >>> >> > >> still >>> >> > >> >> > >> >considerably easier than the tag->domino effect we >>>have >>> now. >>> >> > IMO >>> >> > >> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Filip Maj >>><[email protected] >>> > >>> >> > wrote: >>> >> > >> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> +1 release 1.8.1 >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 6/11/12 2:15 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <[email protected]> >>>wrote: >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >So we have a fairly big issue in iOS 1.8 wherein a >>> >> PhoneGap >>> >> > >> app is >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >crashing if the user swipes down the notification >>> centre >>> >> > while >>> >> > >> >> > >>in-app. >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >The question is whether this is a bug big enough to >>> cut an >>> >> > >> 1.8.1 >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >official release for all platforms or if pointing >>> users to >>> >> > the >>> >> > >> >> minor >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >tag is enough. >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >[+1] release 1.8.1 >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >[ -1] do not release 1.8.1 >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >I think a tag should suffice but if implementors >>>have >>> no >>> >> > >> trouble >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >tagging a release then we might as well save >>>Shaz/Becky >>> >> the >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >email/twitter complaint! >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >> >-- >>> >> > >> >> > >> >@purplecabbage >>> >> > >> >> > >> >risingj.com >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > >> >>> >> > >> >> > > >>> >> > >> >> > > >>> >> > >> >> > >-- >>> >> > >> >> > >@purplecabbage >>> >> > >> >> > >risingj.com >>> >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >> >> >>> >> > >> >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > -- >>> >> > > @purplecabbage >>> >> > > risingj.com >>> >> > >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > @purplecabbage >>> > risingj.com >>>
