This thread is now out of control, and hopefully this is the signal that we need to have a hangout and dig into this.
Thank you Leo for your insight, and representing the user. The system is elaborately complex, and I fear that a) independent versions pushes these platform disparities firmly in the users face b) the matrix Peter eludes to would have 4 dimensions I would much rather see all platforms march forwards together, and get the version bump regardless of what had changed. This way we could at least say 7.5.4 means you get FeatureA for all platforms, and FeatureB for platformY, If we could get versioning/releasing down to a simple tag-all-repos, log-all-changes, update+release all of everything, the system will at least be more understandable. I also think this would make us better at releasing, which we currently suck at ( no-one's fault ) I still want to release every month, rain or shine, and whether or not we make a big or little noise around any release would/could be decided by what made it in. Leo's suggestion, of advancing the CLI version number every time a platform updates makes some sense too, if we aren't willing to just tag and release all. This is a repost, as I apparently only sent this to Peter earlier. Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 6, 2014, at 3:37 PM, Smith, Peter <pet...@fast.au.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Super version flexibility == Super version confusion. > > The Cordova site seems in need of a kind of Cordova/Platform/CLI/CorePlugin > "version dependency matrix" which officially documents what-works-with-what > (e.g. what has passed the official testing). Perhaps it would look something > like the API support matrix at > http://cordova.apache.org/docs/en/3.6.0/guide_support_index.md.html#Platform%20Support. > > It might not be easy to do, but if the combined wit of Cordova committers is > unable to clearly document versioning dependencies then what hope is there > for end users to understand it? > > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: agri...@google.com [mailto:agri...@google.com] On Behalf Of Andrew > Grieve > Sent: Sunday, 5 October 2014 5:05 AM > To: Treggiari, Leo > Cc: Brian LeRoux; Andrew Grieve; dev@cordova.apache.org; Marcel Kinard > Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary > > To the best of my knowledge, the version numbers of platforms do not signify > that platforms have the same functionality. Version numbers for plugins also > don't really do this - many plugins have different capabilities on different > platforms even at the same version number. > > For example, whitelists mean different things on different platforms. > Another example is that different platforms added support for ArrayBuffers > over the exec() bridge at different times. Historically - platform version > numbers just mean that they were all released at the same time. > > For the most part, platforms keep changing to keep up with OS changes, but > almost never are there features that are added across all platforms at the > same time. > > > > > On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:10 PM, Treggiari, Leo <leo.treggi...@intel.com> > wrote: > >> Here’s my concern regarding versions of things in Cordova. As a >> developer I would use Cordova to write portable applications. Sure, >> maybe some developers use Cordova for other reasons, but, to me at >> least, that seems to be the primary “drawâ€. >> >> >> >> When writing a portable application, I want it to be as easy as >> possible to know that what I want to use is supported everywhere I >> want to deploy my app. >> >> >> >> Plugins have independent versions. That makes sense. As a developer >> I can see what the API of plugin ‘FOO’ version ‘x.y.z’ is, and then >> look at a table to see where it is supported. That answers my >> questions about APIs and how I can use them in a portable manner. >> >> >> >> I want the same to be true of ‘platform’ and Cordova CLI versions as >> much as possible. Maybe it is true already, but all of these >> independent releases and different platform version numbers make me >> nervous. For example, If a platform releases version 3.6.0, does that >> mean that it supports the same set of features that other platforms >> that release 3.6.0 do? The major.minor.patch versioning scheme makes a >> great deal of sense. >> However, imagine all platforms started at version 3.0 with the same >> set of features. Then 4 separate platforms each added 5 different >> features in an upward compatible manner and so they are now all at >> version 3.5.0. How does that help our users figure out how they can >> write a portable application? >> >> >> >> Maybe there is a clear definition of what platform version numbers >> mean and I’m just not aware of it. Maybe a CLI release is not just a >> collection of the latest platform releases and I’m just not aware of >> it. It makes sense that platforms can release asynchronously, but >> does the versioning scheme help the user figure out what is going on >> and when and where they can expect common functionality across platforms? >> >> >> >> Leo >> >> >> >> *From:* brian.ler...@gmail.com [mailto:brian.ler...@gmail.com] *On >> Behalf Of *Brian LeRoux >> *Sent:* Friday, October 03, 2014 5:29 PM >> *To:* Andrew Grieve >> *Cc:* dev@cordova.apache.org; Marcel Kinard; Treggiari, Leo >> >> *Subject:* Re: Independent platform release summary >> >> >> >> I meant pinning all platforms to the cli (so an update to any of the >> platforms pushes everything up one). Anyhow this is way hard to reason >> about. So its an improvement how again? >> >> On Oct 3, 2014 4:55 PM, "Andrew Grieve" <agri...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >> Is pinning not what's driving this version number discussion? >> >> >> >> Projects are generally made up of more plugins than platforms, but we >> don't bump the CLI each time plugins are released. Maybe the simplest >> thing to do is just have the CLI version not be influenced by platform >> versions at all. >> >> >> >> Ideally, we'll finish up the work to write the platform versions in >> config.xml, and then users won't accidentally update their platform >> versions without explicitly doing so in their config.xml (or some >> equivalent CLI command that updates it). >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: >> >> Maybe pinning platforms and the CLI wasn't so bad after all. >> >>> On Oct 3, 2014 2:34 PM, "Treggiari, Leo" <leo.treggi...@intel.com> wrote: >>> >>> I agree that this is, and will be, confusing. It was confusing >>> today in our own discussions in our own team (who are, in general, >>> fairly Cordova >>> savvy) to be talking about the Android store issue related to >>> "Cordova 3.5.1". E.g. what did it mean to be talking about "Cordova >>> 3.5.1", and what would a user need to do to get the fix? What I >>> took away was that a user would need Cordova CLI 3.5.0-0.2.7. >>> However, I wouldn't be >> surprised >>> if you told me that was wrong... >>> >>> Anyway, a completely different (and possibly immediately >>> dismissible) idea. What if a Cordova CLI version number was the >>> same as the highest version number of the platforms supported by that >>> Cordova CLI version. >>> E.g. if the latest highest platform version was Android 3.5.1, then >>> the Cordova CLI version would be 3.5.1. The supported >>> other-platform version might be lower - e.g. Windows 3.4.2 (totally made up >>> version number...). >>> >>> That doesn't instantly solve all problems. What if the next >>> platform release after Android 3.5.1 was Windows 3.4.3? Cordova CLI >>> can't remain >> at >>> the highest version number. So would Cordova CLI become 3.5.2 or >> 3.5.1-1? >>> Should the Windows release be 3.5.2? Are there a specific set of >>> features associated with a specific platform major version number? >>> It seems that >> a >>> platform release named 3.x.y is expected to have a certain set of >> features >>> implemented. Is a platform release named 3.4.x expected to have a >> certain >>> set of features and a platform named 3.5.x expected to have those >> features >>> plus some additional feature? >>> >>> In general, what can a user expect these version numbers to mean. E.g. >> if >>> I as an app developer want to use a particular recently added >>> feature on multiple platforms, how do I determine which versions of >>> which platforms support the feature and which Cordova CLI version gives me >>> what I want? >>> >>> Sorry, but it is confusing... >>> >>> Leo >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Marcel Kinard [mailto:cmarc...@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Friday, October 03, 2014 1:56 PM >>> To: dev@cordova.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary >>> >>> If a bump to major indicates an API change, how is that visible to users? >>> Do users look at the CLI version as "the version of Cordova", or are >>> we expecting users to look at the version of every Cordova component >>> to understand where majors got bumped? While I agree the latter is >>> more correct technically, I think users have been and are currently >>> assuming >> the >>> former. It would take some education to switch that. >>> >>>> On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:51 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> I don't think it's necessary to bump CLI major when platforms bump >> major. >>>> Platforms and CLI are linked only superficially anyways. >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cordova.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cordova.apache.org >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cordova.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cordova.apache.org > B‹KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKCB•È [œÝXœØÜšX™KK[XZ[ˆ]‹][œÝXœØÜšX™PÛܙݘK˜\XÚK›Ü™ÃB‘›ÜˆY][Û˜[ÛÛ[X[™ ËK[XZ[ˆ]‹Z[ ÛܙݘK˜\XÚK›Ü™ÃB --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cordova.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cordova.apache.org
