2.10 would mean new features, 2.9.x would mean just bugfixes. With that definition, we can make the release number decision as we evaluate the reason for a release. I'm hoping to not need a 2.10, since it would imply people are not using 3.x yet.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>wrote: > Fun time to go on leave :) > > Good call on putting back Plugin.java for now. > > Definitely agree that we shouldn't have it for 3.0. But! We should point > out that plugins can copy & paste the file into their own package to make > old plugins "just work". > > Joe - one big thing that got missed in your blog post about converting to > CordovaPlugin is that the threading model changes. That's actually the > biggest change in my mind, and plugin devs need to be aware of it. The > default used to be that all calls were made on a new background thread, the > new way is to make the calls on the WebCore thread and have plugins > delegate to background / ui threads manually. > > If we're going to have more 2.x releases, I think it'd make more sense to > call them 2.10, 2.11 rather than 2.9.x. That said, I don't want to stretch > ourselves too thin by trying to maintain two very different branches. > > Marcel - I like your idea of adding release notes / deprecation notices to > the docs. Perhaps this could be merged with the upgrade guides? > > I've been thinking that it would be a good idea to have a Cordova blog > where committers could post to. I think an authoritative news source is > missing right now for Cordova. E.g. release announcements should go there, > what's new announcements, upgrade guides, new plugin announcements, etc. > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > 2.8.1 just got pushed live. The site needs to be rebuilt still. My ruby > > dependencies are all messed up currently and are preventing me from > > rebuilding it. > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > Can we put the website (cordova.io) on Github and accept pull > requests? > > > > > > I think this topic is a good one to take a closer look at our website > > being > > > the center of information that puts the wiki and docs in a single > place. > > > Not saying to merge everything into one single code base or have > > > duplication but provide more rich information and pointers to docs and > > > wiki. > > > > > > Could have a "Release Notes" for the new version. Today the most > > effective > > > way to know what's new is to follow some of the Cordova guys blogs, and > > > this doesn't cover all platforms. > > > > > > We can start with a place holder now "Get ready for Cordova 3.0 !" > > > > > > My 2 cents. > > > > > > Ref: > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/UpdatingTheWebsite > > > > > > > > > > > > --Carlos > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Marcel Kinard wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com > <javascript:;>> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts, > tweets, > > > > > google groups. > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I > > > > >> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki: > > > > >> > > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy > > > > > > > > Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated properly, why > is > > > > there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right things, > > but > > > > for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers. > > > > > > > > If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication, here are > > > some > > > > potential ways to improve that: > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I think > > > > Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And Simon has > a > > > blog > > > > post on this topic. > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that has: > > > > - pointers to other places in the docs (i.e., device.name, > > > > org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which things > > are > > > > going away. And the history of which things already have gone away. > > > > - in that detail, the version or date when they are going > away, > > > > and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova > > <platformX> > > > > Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you don't break > > > when > > > > they do go away. > > > > - these would move it off the wiki into the docs, because > > perhaps > > > > consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should remain on > the > > > > wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is really > > > geared > > > > to contributors/committers, not consumers. > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in Cordova > > x.y". > > > > Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their blogs, > > but > > > > feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of making > > > more > > > > work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in the docs > > (if > > > > they are OK with that). That can include reminders of deprecation > hits. > > > > > > > > Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by plugin > > > authors > > > > or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the > > > > @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something > offered > > by > > > > apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of content. > > Whatever > > > > it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so > consumers > > > > know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back months > later > > > and > > > > look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in 2.2?). > > > > > > > > Comments? > > > > > > > > -- Marcel Kinard > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Carlos Santana > > > <csantan...@gmail.com> > > > > > >
