I would like us to follow our current deprecation policy: 6 months, or 5-6 point releases.
This way we can make noise about it leading up to it for our users. Phonegap.com blog posts, etc. On 9/18/12 11:12 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: >OK, This sounds like a proposal. Do we need to do a vote, or should >we just add a JIRA issue to 2.2? > >On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> >wrote: >> ONLINE_EVENTS and JS_OBJECT are the fastest and have no bugs that I've >> found. As soon as 2.1 ships, let's make the switch. I don't think devs >> should need to know about the bridge modes unless there becomes a >>reason to >> expose this to them. >> >> With several other options other than callback server, I think we should >> get rid of it since it's a fair amount of code and complexity. >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: >> >>> I would be in favor of dropping a deprecation-like notice and educating >>> users about the differences. >>> >>> I would change the default bridge mode to the events one, say in 2.2 or >>> 2.3. Then like 2.5 remove the callback server if we've gone through a >>> couple release with no issues with the new bridge mode. >>> >>> My $0.02. >>> >>> >>> On 9/12/12 12:38 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >Hey >>> > >>> >In 2.1.0, we currently have the ability to use multiple bridges thanks >>> >to Andrew's work. However, we currently still have a series of issues >>> >related to the fact that on Android 4.x, the routing tables decided to >>> >take a vacation and never come back when there's no Internet >>> >connection. This means that the bridge freezes up and never comes >>> >back. This wouldn't be an issue if this wasn't our default bridge >>> >method. In addition to this, a large amount of memory usage on >>> >Android is also taken up with this callback server. So, I think we >>> >should take this thing out behind the shed and put it out of its >>> >misery. >>> > >>> >As far as what should replace it, I'm for the overriding of the online >>> >event for replacing it, since it performs faster than the others, and >>> >actually works across all the versions of Android based on what I've >>> >tested so far (2.2.2 to 4.1.1). >>> > >>> >Any thoughts or reasons why this method should survive? >>> > >>> >Joe >>> >>>
