iOS passes all tests and tagged 1.8.1
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: > Android Tagged. > > All pre-1.9 work will happen on 1.8.1pre branch. > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Js tagged! >> >> On 6/12/12 10:53 AM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >OK, Waiting for the 1.8.1 tag on cordova-js then :P >> > >> >+1 >> > >> >On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 10:49 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> >> 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 >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
