I am against it. Its not going to achieve the goal of alleviating confusion. People see the CLI as the version not the platforms. I'd rather we went to 5 if anything. On Oct 9, 2014 3:56 PM, "Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH)" < panar...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> I meant tag and start the vote for the next release :) > > On 10/9/14, 3:01 PM, "Chuck Lantz" <cla...@microsoft.com> wrote: > > >+1 > > > >-Chuck > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Jesse [mailto:purplecabb...@gmail.com] > >Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 2:55 PM > >To: dev@cordova.apache.org > >Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary > > > >+1 to not voting ;) , it implies we will wait 72 hours before moving on. > > > >How about if anyone is completely against 10.0.0 they voice it here, in > >the next couple hours, otherwise we move forward. > > > >@purplecabbage > >risingj.com > > > >On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> > >wrote: > > > >> I don't think a vote is necessary. I'd hate to see us resort to voting > >> to solve problems. Voting should be a last resort if consensus is > >> split. I don't see that in this scenario. > >> > >> I propose we bumb the version up to 10.0.0. > >> > >> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH) < > >> panar...@microsoft.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Lets start with a vote for 10.0.0 ? And if someone feels strongly > >> > about calling it something the vote could be cancelled !! > >> > > >> > On 10/9/14, 2:41 PM, "Chuck Lantz" <cla...@microsoft.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > >Yeah agreed - Vladimir squashed the bug and what was at once point > >> > >to be called 3.7.0 has been mainly waiting on a version number. > >> > >Personally I am fine with 10.0.0 or 5.0.0 - Either send the message > >> > >that platform versions are divorced from the CLI from a versioning > >> > >perspective (though behavior is still predictable). Leo - I think > >> > >at least out of the gate devs will likely focus on the CLI version > >> > >as primary. Basically today, the cadence version of the CLI is > >> > >what people talk about. Heck, Cordova > >> > >3.4.1 was 3.4.0 for all platforms but iOS. The main message is > >> > >that > >> when > >> > >you platform add android, you may see an npm pull for > >> > >cordova-android@4.3.2 and that is expected. It's just formalizing > >> > >the message and allows independent platform rev'ing. > >> > > > >> > >-Chuck > >> > > > >> > >-----Original Message----- > >> > >From: Steven Gill [mailto:stevengil...@gmail.com] > >> > >Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 2:13 PM > >> > >To: dev@cordova.apache.org > >> > >Cc: Michal Mocny; Marcel Kinard > >> > >Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary > >> > > > >> > >I think vladimir fixed the bug. We just need to release now. > >> > > > >> > >Only thing holding back the release now is consensus on the version > >> > >of the cli. It seemed like most people were leaning toward 10.0.0. > >> > >Should I move forward with that? I would just have to branch + pin > >> > >deps > >> > > > >> > >Leo the documentation version dropdown box would be tied to cli > >>version. > >> > >It still makes sense to copy over platform documentation into > >> > >platform repos and maybe copy it into docs during generation time. > >> > > > >> > >As for plugin pinning, plugins have more to do with platforms. I > >> wouldn't > >> > >say they aren't tied to the cli at all. I understand your point > >>though. > >> > >So far, we haven't had any plugins that won't work with previous > >> versions > >> > >(As far as I know). We should really fix the engine stuff for > >> > >plugins so we can keep track of what platforms they work for. I'd > >> > >like us to give warnings to users to update their plugins if newer > >>versions are out. > >> > >Cordova info should also dump what versions of plugins you have > >> installed > >> > >if it doesn't already. In combination with cordova --save & cordova > >> > >--restore, we should be able to recommend a workflow that is easily > >> > >reproducible on any machine. > >> > > > >> > >On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:44 PM, Chuck Lantz <cla...@microsoft.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> Okay - so - there's a pretty nasty CLI blocker bug right now. > >> > >> Plugins with dependencies don't install (this affects all > >> > >> platforms). In my opinion, we need to get a CLI release out > >> > >> really soon. Are we closed on this topic, or do we need to look > >> > >> at doing the old process to get this out the door while we are > >>still talking? > >> > >> > >> > >> There are also a series of other bugs in the currently tagged > >>"3.6.4" > >> > >> platforms for Android, Windows, and Windows Phone 8. These can > >> > >> be handled independently, but the CLI bug can't. > >> > >> > >> > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-7670 > >> > >> > >> > >> -Chuck > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> From: Treggiari, Leo [mailto:leo.treggi...@intel.com] > >> > >> Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 12:23 PM > >> > >> To: Michal Mocny > >> > >> Cc: Marcel Kinard; dev > >> > >> Subject: RE: Independent platform release summary > >> > >> > >> > >> I'll have to admit that this seems a bit weird. That is, > >> > >> independent versions of the CLI and platforms, with a "Cordova > >> > >> release" named "something" - e.g. a date? > >> > >> > >> > >> Imagine a user wants to know whether the new whitelist entry in > >> > >> config.xml is supported in the versions of CLI and platforms that > >> > >> they have - assuming they understand the distinction between the > >> > >> CLI and platforms to begin with. They use some command to list > >> > >> the versions of the "things" (CLI and > >> > >> platforms) they have installed. They go to the individual > >> > >> documentation of the "things" and try to figure it out. > >> > >> > >> > >> The way the Cordova documentation works today is nice with the > >> > >> combo box where I can select a Cordova version - 3.6.0, 3.5.0, > >> > >> ... What would the combo box contain in the new versioning > >> > >> scheme and how many entries would there be? Are the answers > >>"dates" and "lots of dates"? > >> > >> Or would there be no Cordova version documentation other than an > >> > >> explanation of how to get the list of "things" you currently have > >> > >> and where to find the documentation on them. > >> > >> > >> > >> To "pin" or not to "pin. > >> > >> > >> > >> Note that, to me, the pinning choice defines what happens when I > >> > >>use "cordova {plugin | platform} add foo" with no specific > >> > >>version specified. > >> > >> > >> > >> I've understood, so far at least, that plugins are not pinned (an > >> > >> add always fetches something) and platforms are pinned to a CLI > >> > >> version (an add tells the CLI that I will be using that platform > >> > >> (already > >> > >> installed) for this project). Everything I have read which > >> > >> includes 1 book and the on-line project documentation, suggest > >> > >> that, even if not stating it explicitly. E.g. plugins talk about > >> > >> "fetching" and platforms don't. There is a way to fetch a > >> > >> specific version of platform support. That's good and if I do > >> > >> that it is up to me to understand the compatibility of the > >>specific version I requested. > >> > >> > >> > >> Is this true? If so then the npm cordova behavior seems weird. > >> > >> That is, if I "npm install cordova" I get a set of pinned > >> > >> platforms. If I "npm update cordova", I get a new CLI and > >> > >> nothing else - i.e. not the platforms that were pinned to that > >>version of the CLI? > >> > >> > >> > >> Should the plugin and platform 'pin' behavior be the same? > >> > >> > >> > >> Should both be pinned? Some may find this alternative > >>"blasphemous" > >> > >> but the core plugin versions tested with a version of the CLI > >> > >> could be pinned to the version of the CLI. > >> > >> > >> > >> Should both not be pinned? It would be more consistent and if > >> > >> users are OK with plugins being unpinned, why not platforms? > >> > >> > >> > >> But maybe plugins and platforms are different. Plugins are > >> > >> purely run-time code. Platforms are primarily tooling with some > >> > >> run-time > >> code. > >> > >> Does that difference make the current pinning behavior the best > >> choice. > >> > >> > >> > >> Maybe, but personally I would prefer both to be pinned - i.e. I > >> > >> install a version of Cordova, and until I update it, every time I > >> > >> add a platform or 'core' plugin, I get the same thing. > >> > >> > >> > >> Leo > >> > >> > >> > >> From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of > >> Michal > >> > >> Mocny > >> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 1:47 PM > >> > >> To: Treggiari, Leo > >> > >> Cc: Michal Mocny; Marcel Kinard; dev > >> > >> Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary > >> > >> > >> > >> With this direction, there is no single number. Users should not > >> > >> functionally care about CLI version, so there will just be the > >> > >> platform versions that matter, really. > >> > >> > >> > >> Downstreams can of course put labels on combinations of versions, > >> > >> so "PhoneGap 4" may be Android 4, iOS 3.8, and etc. > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Treggiari, Leo > >> > >> <leo.treggi...@intel.com <mailto:leo.treggi...@intel.com>> wrote: > >> > >> > Did I miss anything? > >> > >> > >> > >> I don't think we closed on this (I had to leave the meeting a > >> > >> little > >> > >> early) but a remaining question is how to version what we (and > >> > >> users) call "Cordova". Assuming a "Cordova" version is a point > >> > >> in time collection of the latest CLI version + platform versions > >> > >> + plugin versions. Is the Cordova version semver (using what > >> > >> algorithm with respect to its contained > >> > >> components) or is that what you meant by ""latest as of Oct > >> > >> 2014" or something". > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Leo > >> > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> > >> From: mmo...@google.com<mailto:mmo...@google.com> [mailto: > >> > >> mmo...@google.com<mailto:mmo...@google.com>] On Behalf Of Michal > >> Mocny > >> > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 1:13 PM > >> > >> To: Michal Mocny > >> > >> Cc: Marcel Kinard; dev > >> > >> Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary Thanks everyone > >> > >> for participation in what was a long and grueling discussion. > >> > >> > >> > >> Summary of current proposal: > >> > >> - Cad-ver is dead. > >> > >> - Everything moves Sem-ver, with platforms continuing from > >> > >> current versions and diverging over time. > >> > >> - CLI potentially gets a significant version bump to showcase > >> > >> this reset (to 5.0 or 10.0, not yet settled) > >> > >> - Pinning default platform versions *will* continue for the time > >> > >> being, but it will be trivial to override the default. > >> > >> - Platforms will have CLI <engine> tag equivalent (unclear yet if > >> > >> as node peerDependency or otherwise) so devs will know when they > >> > >> need to upgrade/downgrade CLI for non-default platform versions. > >> > >> - After a platform update, eventually CLI will release to "pin" > >> > >> the new default, and bump its PATCH/MINOR version (unless CLI had > >> > >> a functional update at same time that requires a larger bump). > >> > >> - After you update CLI, your existing projects don't change & > >> > >> platform upgrades remain explicit, but you will now get warnings > >> > >> if your installed platforms are older than the CLI pinned versions. > >> > >> - Event MAJOR changes to platforms are not MAJOR updates to the > >> > >> CLI, unless there is an actual breaking change to the CLI tool > >> > >> (i.e. new CLI will no longer work with the currently installed > >>platform). > >> > >> - Platform and CLI docs have to split out and be released & > >> > >> versioned alongside each (like plugins). Cross references from > >> > >> one to the other will only be needed in a few places. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Note: The CLI-Platform compatibility story is functionally no > >> > >>different than we have today. If you upgrade your CLI and there > >> > >>is a breaking change, you will have to re-create your projects or > >> > >>downgrade CLI again. > >> > >> Now we plan to be more explicit about it and offer warnings. > >> > >> > >> > >> Note: There is no concept of a "fancy-pants" release other than > >> > >> to say "latest as of Oct 2014" or something. Platforms don't > >> > >> have a single common set of functionality, so CadVer was somewhat > >> > >> misleading already in that sense. We could introduce a concept > >> > >> of "API Level" for exec bridge or something for use by plugins, > >>but not sure that has value. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> What wasn't covered that came to mind after the fact: > >> > >> - When there is an update available for CLI, should we give a > >> > >> warning to update? (this is useful, but isn't common for npm > >> > >> modules. I think we already do this from plugman when you try to > >>publish plugins?). > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Did I miss anything? > >> > >> > >> > >> -Michal > >> > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Michal Mocny > >> > >><mmo...@chromium.org<mailto: > >> > >> mmo...@chromium.org>> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > External Public link for those that just want to watch/chat: > >> > >> > https://plus.google.com/events/cm4l0vifcig920qkhpn5stqiet4 > >> > >> > > >> > >> > Hangout link to join the conversation: > >> > >> > > >> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/hoaevent/AP36tYcNwXEyet4Xv_23HiTl > >> > >> > 4I K0jsM4NlmGy5kbLsPIW3SnOsUEIQ?authuser=0&hl=en > >> > >> > > >> > >> > See you in 30 minutes. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Michal Mocny > >> > >> > <mmo...@chromium.org > >> > >> <mailto:mmo...@chromium.org>> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > >> >> +dev list again > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> Not everyone could make 1pm, not everyone could make 2pm. > >> > >> >> While I don't think we need a full 2 hours, I'm hoping to > >> > >> >> start late and end early -- proving opportunity people to pop > >> > >> >> in at either time and chime > >> > >> in. > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Marcel Kinard > >> > >> >> <cmarc...@gmail.com<mailto:cmarc...@gmail.com>> > >> > >> >> wrote: > >> > >> >> > >> > >> >>> Is the expected duration 1 hour or 2 hours? > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> >>> On Oct 8, 2014, at 10:56 AM, Michal Mocny > >> > >><mmo...@chromium.org<mailto: > >> > >> mmo...@chromium.org>> wrote: > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> >>> > So it looks like Today 1-3 EST or Friday 1-3 EST are the > >> > >> >>> > best > >> > >>times. > >> > >> >>> I'm > >> > >> >>> > going to start the ball rolling to do this TODAY, but if > >> > >> >>> > that proves > >> > >> >>> too > >> > >> >>> > short notices we'll move it to Friday. > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> >>> > I'll email out links to hangout at 12:30 or so, and I'm > >> > >> >>> > hoping Steven > >> > >> >>> can > >> > >> >>> > make it before 2pm since he's been most active with > >> > >> >>> > releases > >> > >> recently. > >> > >> >>> > > >> > >> >>> > -Michal > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> >>> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > >------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > >-- 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� > >?�?[��X��ܚX�K??K[XZ[?�??]�][��X��ܚX�P?�ܙ?ݘK�\?X�?K�ܙ�B��܈?Y??]?[ۘ[??��[X[� > >?�??K[XZ[?�??]�Z?[???�ܙ?ݘK�\?X�?K�ܙ�B > >
