Thanks for organzing a hangout Michal. We badly need it. Lots of great points have been made and I'm hoping we can all reach a consensus on this issue and move past it.
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 10:24 AM, Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH) < panar...@microsoft.com> wrote: > Thanks Michael for the document, discussing it would be much easier. > > Do you think we should change the proposal sections to also list the > pros/cons of each approach? This way, we would also capture various > concerns raised in this thread. > > -----Original Message----- > From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal > Mocny > Sent: Tuesday, October 7, 2014 8:52 AM > To: Michal Mocny > Cc: Joe Bowser; dev > Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary > > Created a doc to summarize. Trying to keep it concise and free of > opinions/conclusions, only context & goals. > > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VqAVo2AA5vZ7LRmq_9jJ6oa7Nyr2OrjLCfEkBhO-X8U/edit?usp=sharing > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > +dev list again :P > > > > The timezone in the doodle is EST but there is a switcher to set your > > own (surprised it didn't do that). > > > > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 11:01 AM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> What timezone is this meant for? > >> > >> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >> > >>> Here is a doodle for those interested -- but if this timeline is too > >>> hasty we can figure out a future date: > >>> http://doodle.com/a2nd8n3z8dm4ffbx. > >>> I'm > >>> rather busy for two weeks starting next week (as are many of us in > >>> prep for sh dev conf & pgday) so really hope we can do this this > >>> week. > >>> > >>> I'll put together a doc outlining some goals/non-goals and the > >>> current proposals and we can discuss the tradeoffs and brainstorm > options. > >>> > >>> -Michal > >>> > >>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Josh Soref <jso...@blackberry.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > (d) CLI versions completely independent of platforms, just like > >>> plugins. > >>> > > - In this case, we need to implement platform->cli version > >>> requirements > >>> > > (node peerDependancies?) > >>> > > - Basically means we play down CLI version entirely, users are > >>> > > just expected to stay up to date with CLI always. Platform > >>> > > versions are > >>> all > >>> > > that matters. I don't think this is too different than what we > >>> > > have > >>> > today. > >>> > > >>> > I personally like (d) most. > >>> > > >>> > Say we start at 5.0.0 for cli. > >>> > * When a platform updates, we can go to 5.0.1. > >>> > > >>> > * When cli adds a new feature, we can go to 5.1.0. > >>> > > >>> > * When the cli removes a feature/ platform , we can go to 6.0.0. > >>> > > >>> > Mostly, that should take us for 5.0.1000. Or occasionally to > >>> > 5.2.5000, > >>> and > >>> > rarely to 6.0.5. > >>> > > >>> > Say a platform is at 3.7.0. > >>> > * When a platform makes changes, it goes from 3.7.1. > >>> > > >>> > * When a platform adds a feature, it can go to 3.8.0. > >>> > > >>> > * When a platform drops support for a platform / configuration, it > >>> goes to > >>> > 4.0.0. > >>> > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cordova.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cordova.apache.org >
