On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>wrote: > >> Responses inline. For all of them, I'll update the wiki to make things >> clear. >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org>wrote: >> >>> For Strategy page: >>> >>> RE: Weekly Releases -- do we skip a release if there is nothing >>> significant >>> to push, or do we release so long as there is at least one patch? >>> >> I'd say skip. >> >> >> >>> RE: Cadence Releases -- "These releases include: platform repos, >>> cordova-js, mobile-spec, cordova-docs, cordova-cli, cordova-plugman" -- >>> clarifying that "include" for the sem-ver projects means only packaging >>> into a zip/tarball, not that we bump versions numbers during a cadence >>> release? Or do we bump sem-ver as well? >>> >> >> cordova-js, mobile-spec, cordova-docs, cordova-cli: Update their versions >> to the current CadVer >> plugman: Probably should be removed from this list. >> platform-repos: semver bump if there were any changes since prev release. >> >> >> >>> ====== >>> >>> For plugin release page: >>> "# Edit version within plugin.xml based off of changes." --- this >>> means >>> "deduce the semantic effect on version" right? IE, is it a >>> major/minor/point release? >>> >> Yes (will update wording) >> >>> >>> Generally, how do we prevent changes from sneaking in to core plugins >>> during the time it takes release master to make the changes? The release >>> master has to commit back to Changelog. Perhaps he/she makes that change >>> directly on master, and we rebase that change back into dev after the >>> release? That way, we don't read from dev branch once a release process >>> is >>> started. >>> >> Hrm, how about instead of merging dev->master, we merge CHANGELOG.md >> commit -> master. >> > Actually, this will work fine as-is so long as you don't git pull in the > middle of things. going to leave as-is. > >> >> >>> >>> "For each plugin that had unreleased commits .. increment the micro" -- >>> why? >>> >> So that the version on dev is greater than the version on master. >> >> >>> >>> TEST section -- suggest adding a not to the top of the guide so that you >>> create mobile-spec BEFORE starting the release. This way, you create a >>> project with the old versions of plugins more easily. >>> >> >> Good idea. >> > Actually - going to wait on this as well. It's unlikely that even before you start that you'll have the old versions of things checked out (more likely you have some in-between releases state). Once we have the registry, we can do this easily. > >>> ====== >>> >>> Generally these looks really good (haven't finished reading Cadence >>> release >>> doc yet, will comment on that soon). However, while I love the code >>> snippets for suggested commands, some of them look like they wouldn't >>> work >>> if you copy&paste them. Perhaps we should go through the docs on the >>> next >>> release and make it clear which are verbatim commands and which are just >>> documentation-with-code. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 12:18 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Finally finished updating the wiki's instructions to follow this >>> proposal. >>> > >>> > Summary of changes: >>> > >>> > https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/VersioningAndReleaseStrategy >>> > - Explains our versioning strategy (SemVer vs CadVer) >>> > >>> > https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CommitterWorkflow >>> > - Extracted Pull Requst Processing into its own page ( >>> > ProcessingPullRequests< >>> > https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/ProcessingPullRequests> >>> > ) >>> > - Added a "Which Branch to Commit To" section >>> > - Minor tweaks to commit process: >>> > - Mention `git rebase origin/master -i` >>> > - Marked some steps as optional >>> > - Linked to post-review (rbtools) install page >>> > - Made it more explicit that you should test commits you patch in >>> > >>> > https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/StepsForPluginRelease >>> > - Process to go through to update core plugins >>> > >>> > https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/StepsForToolsRelease >>> > - Process to go through to update plugman / CLI >>> > >>> > https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CuttingReleases >>> > - Made it clear that it applies to Cadence Releases >>> > - Expanded "What to test" section >>> > - Added releasing of CLI to the steps >>> > - Moved "Official Apache Releases" to the bottom >>> > >>> > To all steps release steps pages, I've added an "Update CHANGELOG.md" >>> step. >>> > iOS has done this forever, but I think all repos should do it. >>> > >>> > Would love if these pages could be read by all committers. Especially >>> the >>> > StepsForToolsRelease page, as I've never done a tools release (and so >>> was >>> > somewhat guessing). >>> > >>> > Another part I'm unsure of is where the mapping to platform repo >>> versions >>> > is within CLI. >>> > >>> > There are still some points to discuss, which I will send separate >>> emails >>> > about :) >>> > >>> > >>> > On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Ian Clelland <iclell...@google.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org >>> > >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >>> > > > After the discussion on the group hangout + some sleeping, I think >>> > we're >>> > > > ready for a proposal... So here it is! >>> > > > - It does *not* propose any changes to our Deprecation policy. >>> That's >>> > for >>> > > > another thread (which I'll get to on Monday if no one else does) :) >>> > > > - It does not contain how we store version numbers. That's covered >>> > here: >>> > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/StoringRepoVersionsDesign >>> > > > >>> > > > Once we get to a consensus, I'll transfer this to the wiki. Please >>> > > review & >>> > > > comment! >>> > > > >>> > > > There are two kinds of versions: >>> > > > 1. "SemVer" (www.semver.org) >>> > > > - Used by platforms, plugman, cli >>> > > > 2. "CadVer" (just made that up :P "Cadence Version") >>> > > > - Used by cli, mobile-spec, cordova-js >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > I like this, as it separates the fast-moving, feature-based semantic >>> > > version of any given component from the API level, and >>> interoperability >>> > > promises, of the "Cadence Version". >>> > > >>> > > What, then, is the granularity of the Cadence Version intended to >>> be? Is >>> > is >>> > > the "3" in Cordova 3.0, and will stay at 3 until it hits 4 next year? >>> > (Or, >>> > > just as descriptively, we can say that it is at "Cordova Fancy-Pants" >>> > now, >>> > > and eventually progress to "Cordova Enraged-Wombat") >>> > > >>> > > Or is it going to have major and minor components as well, and >>> advance >>> > > roughly monthly, as before? >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > There are two kinds of releases: >>> > > > 1. Patch releases >>> > > > - Pretty much any repo can release a patch release to fix bugs >>> at >>> > any >>> > > > time (but should have good reason) >>> > > > 2. Cadence releases >>> > > > - These follow the 10 releases per year, as enumerated on: >>> > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/RoadmapProjects >>> > > > >>> > > > cordova-plugins: >>> > > > - Commit only to the `dev` branch >>> > > > - Use semver for them. >>> > > > - If the version on master is "3.0.0", then the version on dev >>> will >>> > > > start at "3.0.1-dev". >>> > > > - If any commit goes in that add a feature, then change the >>> version >>> > on >>> > > > dev to "3.1.0-dev" >>> > > > - If any commit goes in that makes an non-backwards-compatible >>> > change, >>> > > > then change the version on dev to "4.0.0-dev" >>> > > > - Release plugins at most once a week (Thursdays?) >>> > > > - This *does* mean that a change that goes in Wednesday could >>> end up >>> > > > being released the next day. >>> > > > - Release plugins all at the same time so that we can blog the >>> release >>> > > > notes. >>> > > > - Release process: >>> > > > 1. Create a JIRA issue to track the status of the release. >>> > > > a. Comments should be added to this bug after each top-level >>> step >>> > > > below is taken >>> > > > 2. For each plugin that has unreleased commits on their `dev` >>> > branch: >>> > > > a. Update its CHANGELOG file with a prettified version of "git >>> > log" >>> > > > b. Update its plugin.xml version by removing the "-dev" suffix >>> > > > c. Merge dev -> master (without pushing) >>> > > > d. Update its plugin.xml version by incrementing the micro and >>> > > adding >>> > > > "-dev" (as described above) >>> > > > 3. Combine all plugin changelogs into a Release announcement >>> blog >>> > post >>> > > > on cordova-website. >>> > > > a. Steps for this exist in cordova-website's README.md >>> > > > 4. Test >>> > > > a. Create mobilespec using the old versions of plugins >>> > > > b. Perform a "plugin upgrade" for plugins that have changes >>> (right >>> > > > now, this means doing a `plugin remove` followed by a `plugin add` >>> > > > c. Run through mobilespec, ensuring to do manual tests that >>> relate >>> > > to >>> > > > changes in the changelog >>> > > > 5. Push! >>> > > > a. Push all branches >>> > > > b. Push the blog post >>> > > > >>> > > > cordova-plugman: >>> > > > - Commit to master always >>> > > > - Release only when necessary. >>> > > > - Release process: >>> > > > 1. For releases that increment the minor or major, email the >>> dev >>> > list >>> > > > to let others know about your intent to release (include changelog) >>> > > > a) Wait for at least one +1 >>> > > > 2. Increment the version within package.json >>> > > > 3. Update RELEASENOTES.md with the changes for this release >>> > > > 4. Push to npmjs.org >>> > > > * In order to push, you must be given push access to the npm >>> > > module. >>> > > > * To do so, ask one of the existing module maintainers >>> (listed >>> > > here: >>> > > > https://npmjs.org/package/plugman) >>> > > > 5. Post a release announcement on the cordova blog (for feature >>> > > > releases only) >>> > > > a. Steps for this exist in cordova-website's README.md >>> > > > b. Not necessary for patch releases, but feature releases >>> should >>> > > > mention significant bugs fixed by previous patch releases. >>> > > > >>> > > > No JIRA: The process is light-weight enough that a JIRA issue isn't >>> > > > necessary for tracking. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > cordova-cli: >>> > > > - Commit to master, release from release branches (2.9.x, 3.0.x, >>> etc) >>> > > > - Versioned using "$COROVA_VERSION-$CLI_VERSION" >>> > > > - E.g. 3.0.0-0.5.1 >>> > > > - The first version component is the "cadence version", and >>> has its >>> > > > minor incremented whenever the platform repository that it lazy >>> loads >>> > by >>> > > > default is changed >>> > > > - E.g. 3.0.0 uses cordova-blackberry@3.0.0, >>> cordova-ios@3.0.0, >>> > > > cordova-android@3.0.0 >>> > > > - E.g. 3.1.0 uses cordova-blackberry@3.1.0, >>> cordova-ios@3.0.1, >>> > > > cordova-android@4.0.0 >>> > > > - E.g. 3.2.0 uses cordova-blackberry@3.1.1, >>> cordova-ios@3.1.0, >>> > > > cordova-android@4.0.1 >>> > > > - E.g. 3.2.1 uses cordova-blackberry@3.1.2, >>> cordova-ios@3.1.0, >>> > > > cordova-android@4.0.1 >>> > > > - The version number of cordova-cli will be the version number >>> that >>> > we >>> > > > advertise on our website, blogs & docs >>> > > > - Platform version numbers will use semver, and not be >>> > referenced >>> > > > - Release process for patch releases: >>> > > > 1. cherry-pick commits from master -> latest release branch >>> > > > 2. Increment package.json's micro version >>> > > > 3. Update RELEASENOTES.md >>> > > > 4. Push to npmjs.org >>> > > > * In order to push, you must be given push access to the npm >>> > > module. >>> > > > * To do so, ask one of the existing module maintainers >>> (listed >>> > > here: >>> > > > https://npmjs.org/package/cordova) >>> > > > - Release process for minor version >>> > > > - Same as patch release, and in addition: >>> > > > 1. Email the dev list to let others know about your intent to >>> > > release >>> > > > (include changelog) >>> > > > a. Wait for at least one +1 >>> > > > 2. Post a release announcement on the cordova blog (for >>> feature >>> > > > releases only) >>> > > > a. Steps for this exist in cordova-website's README.md >>> > > > b. Not necessary for patch releases, but feature releases >>> > should >>> > > > mention significant bugs fixed by previous patch releases. >>> > > > - Release process for major version: >>> > > > - Refer to platform release process. >>> > > > >>> > > > cordova platforms, mobile-spec, cordova-js: >>> > > > - Same as before (as documented on >>> > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CuttingReleases) >>> > > > - Except: >>> > > > - Platforms versions to use semver. This *does* mean that they >>> will >>> > > > diverge from each other. >>> > > > - cordova-js and cordova-mobile-spec to use the "cadence >>> version" >>> > > > (first part of cordova-cli's version) >>> > > > - No longer update cordova-app-template >>> > > > - Blog post will include changelog for all changes since >>> previous >>> > > > platforms release. >>> > > > - JIRA issue should have a comment that lists the platform >>> versions >>> > > > that are referenced by the cadence version. >>> > > > >>> > > > JIRA workflow: >>> > > > - When issues are closed, the "fixed version" should be set to >>> the >>> > > > cadence version. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Andrew >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Andrew Grieve < >>> agri...@chromium.org> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:49 PM, Michael Brooks < >>> > > mich...@michaelbrooks.ca >>> > > > >wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > Plugins and CLI tools I think we should just ship >>> continuously. >>> > The >>> > > > >> >>> > > > > Why do you think these should be shipped continuously instead of >>> on a >>> > > > > regular cadence? Note that I think they should be as well, but >>> I'm >>> > > trying >>> > > > > to figure out why the tools & plugins are different from the >>> > platforms. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> > only question that remains in the 'how' of that is versioning. >>> > Mike >>> > > > >> > Brookes has advocated semver schema here wherein we version >>> > > platforms >>> > > > >> > separately from the tools using a compound version number. An >>> > > example >>> > > > >> > of this might be 3.0.0-0.14.3 wherein 3.0.0 represents our >>> > platforms >>> > > > >> > while 0.14.3 represents the CLI tool itself. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> I only advocate semver for node modules and you can expect that >>> I'll >>> > > be >>> > > > >> pushing this on cordova-cli soon. :) >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> Node modules use semver. Regardless of whether it's effective or >>> > not, >>> > > > it's >>> > > > >> what the community uses and as developers we should attempt to >>> > respect >>> > > > and >>> > > > >> adhere to it. >>> > > > >> However, Cordova uses a different type of versioning scheme. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> The CLI tool needs to represent both of these versioning >>> schemes. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> - The Cordova version is most important, because it describe >>> what >>> > > > version >>> > > > >> of Cordova the CLI uses. >>> > > > >> - The node module version is important to modules consuming >>> > > cordova-cli. >>> > > > >> You have no idea how frustrating cordova-cli's current >>> versioning is >>> > > wrt >>> > > > >> to >>> > > > >> the phonegap-cli. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> This is why a version such as 3.0.0-0.10.4 works extremely well. >>> > It's >>> > > > >> distributing version 3.0.0 of Cordova. The node module itself is >>> > > version >>> > > > >> 0.10.4. It's also semantically valid in semver, so it's >>> compatible >>> > > with >>> > > > >> npm. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> Michael >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Andrew Grieve < >>> agri...@chromium.org >>> > > >>> > > > >> wrote: >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> >>> wrote: >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > > I think keeping the cadence on the core platforms makes >>> sense. >>> > > That >>> > > > is >>> > > > >> > > where the bulk of logic lives, it is susceptible to 3rd >>> party >>> > > issues >>> > > > >> > > like new iDEs and SDKs, and having that regular cadence in >>> > > lockstep >>> > > > >> > > makes issue tracking easier to discuss with the community. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > > I agree that keeping the number of different version numbers to a >>> > > minimum >>> > > > > makes things easier to track. >>> > > > > I don't really follow your logic about IDEs and SDKs... This >>> would be >>> > > an >>> > > > > argument to *not* synchronize releases I think, since >>> > iOS/Android/WP/BB >>> > > > do >>> > > > > not synchronize their SDK releases :P >>> > > > > I don't think we can apply the cadence argument to platforms, >>> but not >>> > > to >>> > > > > tools & plugins. Why would platforms be different in this >>> respect? >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > >> > > Plugins and CLI tools I think we should just ship >>> continuously. >>> > > The >>> > > > >> > > only question that remains in the 'how' of that is >>> versioning. >>> > > Mike >>> > > > >> > > Brookes has advocated semver schema here wherein we version >>> > > > platforms >>> > > > >> > > separately from the tools using a compound version number. >>> An >>> > > > example >>> > > > >> > > of this might be 3.0.0-0.14.3 wherein 3.0.0 represents our >>> > > platforms >>> > > > >> > > while 0.14.3 represents the CLI tool itself. >>> > > > >> > > >>> > > > >> > > I am not a fan of semver as that it is almost wholly >>> conceptual >>> > > and >>> > > > >> > > thusly non-enforcable. It is a nice framework for reasoning >>> but >>> > > ppl >>> > > > >> > > ignore half of the rules devaluing its promise. Also, it was >>> > > > conceived >>> > > > >> > > originally as a solution for globally installed packages >>> which >>> > > isn't >>> > > > >> > > really an issue in modern situations. That said, having a >>> > > versioning >>> > > > >> > > scheme that exists, is well documented, and generally >>> understood >>> > > are >>> > > > >> > > all positives for me. It would mean our deprec policy could >>> push >>> > > the >>> > > > >> > > version numbers up quickly (which is fine). >>> > > > >> > > >>> > > > >> > > It is important to remember the reason for versioning, for >>> our >>> > > case, >>> > > > >> > > is issue tracking and resolution but as our ecosystem grows >>> it >>> > > will >>> > > > >> > > also play a very important role in dependency management. >>> > > Especially >>> > > > >> > > between plugins. More discreet versions: the better. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > > With the latest <engine> tag work being done ( >>> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-4490), platforms as >>> well as >>> > > > > plugins will be checked using semver. These checks will likely >>> work >>> > > > better >>> > > > > if we try and follow semver. AFAICT, we mostly do already follow >>> it, >>> > > with >>> > > > > the exception of our deprecation policy. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> > > >>> > > > >> > > (Andrew I think you should start a separate thread about >>> killing >>> > > off >>> > > > >> > > cordova-js and moving into platforms for loading now that we >>> > have >>> > > > >> > > mostly removed the plugins. I am very much in favor!) >>> > > > >> > > >>> > > > >> > Yeah, I regretted this almost immediately. Since this thread >>> is >>> > > > >> focusing on >>> > > > >> > the platforms, I'll do just that! >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > > >>> > > > >> > > >>> > > > >> > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Andrew Grieve < >>> > > agri...@chromium.org >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> > > wrote: >>> > > > >> > > > Want to have this as a discussion starter. >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > We've previously established that: >>> > > > >> > > > 1. Releases for plugman & CLI will not be tied to platform >>> > > > releases >>> > > > >> > > > 2. Releases to plugins will not be tied to platform >>> releases >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > That's not to say we shouldn't sometime co-ordinate them >>> with >>> > > > >> platform >>> > > > >> > > > releases, but I think there would need to be a compelling >>> > reason >>> > > > to >>> > > > >> > > couple >>> > > > >> > > > them. >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > I'm wondering if it makes sense to not tie platform >>> releases >>> > > > >> together >>> > > > >> > > > either? E.g. Allow an update to cordova-ios separately >>> from >>> > > > >> > > > cordova-blackberry10. >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > Possible Advantages: >>> > > > >> > > > - Releases will (hopefully) occur more frequently. Don't >>> > need >>> > > to >>> > > > >> wait >>> > > > >> > > for >>> > > > >> > > > synchronization with other platforms to do a release. >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > Possible Disadvantages: >>> > > > >> > > > - Might make for too many releases & spam our users with >>> > > release >>> > > > >> > notes >>> > > > >> > > > too often >>> > > > >> > > > - Might make us lazy and release platforms too >>> infrequently >>> > > > >> > > > - Might make version numbers for platforms not >>> correspond >>> > > > >> date-wise >>> > > > >> > > with >>> > > > >> > > > version numbers of other platforms (e.g. 3.1 ios != 3.1 >>> > android) >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > Other considerations: >>> > > > >> > > > cordova-js is a common piece here. Perhaps that could be >>> > > pulled >>> > > > >> out >>> > > > >> > as >>> > > > >> > > > well? >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > Option 1: Bundle the exec bridge, platform bootstrap & >>> plugin >>> > > > loader >>> > > > >> > with >>> > > > >> > > > the platform, and have the rest available as a plugin. >>> > > > >> > > > Option 2: Bundle exec bridge + platform bootstrap with the >>> > > > platform, >>> > > > >> > > bundle >>> > > > >> > > > the plugin loader with plugman, put the rest in a plugin >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > For reference, the only non-exec-bridge / start-up code I >>> can >>> > > see >>> > > > >> is: >>> > > > >> > > > ./cordova.js <--- hooks addEventListener + has exec >>> bridge >>> > > logic >>> > > > >> > > > ./common/argscheck.js <--- strictly a helper for plugins >>> > > > >> > > > ./common/base64.js <--- exec bridge depends on this >>> > > > >> > > > ./common/builder.js <--- should be folded into >>> > modulemapper.js >>> > > > >> > > > ./common/channel.js <--- start-up code needs this >>> > > > >> > > > ./common/init.js <--- start-up code >>> > > > >> > > > ./common/modulemapper.js <--- start-up code >>> > > > >> > > > ./common/pluginloader.js <--- loads plugins on start-up >>> > > > >> > > > ./common/urlutil.js <--- recently added helper for >>> plugins >>> > > > >> > > > ./common/utils.js <--- mostly misc stuff that may be >>> mostly >>> > > > >> unused? >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > There's also: >>> > > > >> > > > ./windows8/windows8/commandProxy.js >>> > > > >> > > > which I assume is exec bridge releated. >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > I think that argscheck & urlutil would be well-suited as >>> > > > stand-alone >>> > > > >> > > > plugins that other plugins depend on. >>> > > > >> > > >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >> >> >
