Don’t take my comment as an attack to you for starting a discussion in a vote thread, it was not.
As I said, in the past (up until the end of last year), vote threads included “(and keep discussion on the DISCUSS thread)” and we are no longer including it, so it was more of a general question about if we now discuss in the vote threads and I wasn’t aware of the change. El El vie, 5 jun 2026 a las 12:45, Manuel Beck <[email protected]> escribió: > I had different checksums than the release, this is why I wrote it on the > vote thread. I would have never known, that my Mac produces different > checksums than on Linux. Following Brians release guide on gist, a > Discussion mail should be send for the final release pull request. After > that ATR produces the vote mail. When a discussion appears for the release > vote afterwards i would find it logically to answer to the vote thread when > it’s related to the vote release. > > > Am 05.06.2026 um 11:11 schrieb Niklas Merz <[email protected]>: > > > >> (and keep discussion on the DISCUSS thread) > > > > Is not part of the email template on ATR. We should probably add it > > there as well. > > > > I also prefer having a discuss thread to keep things cleaner but I was > > just replying in this case to keep the vote moving forward. > > > > On June 4, 2026, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > >> Just playing devil's advocate here... > >> > >> But I don't think there is any particular Apache policy that said that > >> we needed a VOTE and DISCUSS thread -- I think that was what we did > >> historically just to keep the vote thread clean so that it is easy to > >> tally up the vote counts. > >> > >> I didn't necessarily agree to change the process but maybe with ATR > >> which I believe Apache tooling automatically keeps track of the > >> binding > >> votes maybe we can simplify into one email thread? > >> > >> Just a thought... > >> > >> On Thu, 2026-06-04 at 16:46 +0200, julio cesar sanchez wrote: > >>> Shouldn’t the discussion on the vote thread be here? > >>> > >>> In the past I think the vote threads used to say something like > >>> “please, > >>> keep discussions in the discussion thread”, but it doesn’t say it, > >> so > >>> not > >>> sure if the policy changed. > >>> > >>> El lunes, 25 de mayo de 2026, Manuel Beck > >> <[email protected]> > >>> escribió: > >>> > >>>> Hi Julio, > >>>> > >>>> I think you didn’t understand what I mean regarding the > >>>> „configured“ > >>>> statusbar. Before the statusbar of the Cordova app shined through > >>>> the > >>>> in-app bowser, because the in-app browser was constrained to the > >>>> safe area > >>>> top not the top edge. Now the in-app browser is constrained to the > >>>> top > >>>> edge, which overlays the statusbar of the app and makes the in-app > >>>> browser > >>>> fullscreen. I think the better approach is to let the statusbar > >>>> shine > >>>> through the in-app browser rather than overlaying it. It’s now the > >>>> question > >>>> if the in-app browser should be constrained to the top edge if no > >>>> statusbar > >>>> is visible or always be constrained to the top safe area, letting > >>>> the > >>>> statusbar part of the app always shine through. I think it’s the > >>>> easiest > >>>> and best way to let the statusbar part of the app shine through > >> the > >>>> in-app > >>>> browser, which means, the in-app browser is always constrained to > >>>> the top > >>>> safe area, no matter how the statusbar is configured. > >>>> > >>>>> And for the version bump, I think it should be a major release > >>>>> since > >>>> there > >>>>> are two commits with ! In the title. > >>>>> > >>>>> Funnily enough, one of them removes a method to check if > >>>>> callbacks are > >>>>> valid because it was unused. > >>>> > >>>> Wow, nice catch. I really oversaw the two commits with the !. It’s > >>>> true > >>>> that this requires a major. And you are correct, what Niklas added > >>>> with > >>>> "fix(ios): check callbackId with regex (#1152)“ was removed before > >>>> by > >>>> "chore(ios)!: Remove unused private method (#1113)“, really funny > >>>> :) > >>>> > >>>>> Am 22.05.2026 um 14:35 schrieb julio cesar sanchez < > >>>> [email protected]>: > >>>>> > >>>>> I don’t see that as a blocker, but it’s ok to wait if you think > >>>>> you can > >>>> fix > >>>>> it soon. > >>>>> > >>>>> I have not used the plugin in a while, but in the past it didn’t > >>>>> respect > >>>>> the “configured” status bar color (I quote it because on iOS it > >>>>> has not > >>>>> been possible to style the bar since iOS 7, the status bar adds > >> a > >>>>> fake > >>>> view > >>>>> to simulate and style the status bar). > >>>>> In app browser plugin used to have its one bar that had a solid > >>>>> color and > >>>>> not configurable. So even if that changed recently, I don’t see > >>>>> it as > >>>>> blocker. > >>>>> > >>>>> And for the version bump, I think it should be a major release > >>>>> since > >>>> there > >>>>> are two commits with ! In the title. > >>>>> > >>>>> Funnily enough, one of them removes a method to check if > >>>>> callbacks are > >>>>> valid because it was unused. > >>>>> > >>>>> El El vie, 22 may 2026 a las 13:38, Manuel Beck > >>>> <[email protected]> > >>>>> escribió: > >>>>> > >>>>>> The InAppBrowser does currently ignore a configured statusbar, > >>>>>> this has > >>>> to > >>>>>> be fixed, before a release can make. I will fix this the next > >>>>>> days. > >>>>>> Related issue: > >>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin- > >> inappbrowser/issues/1155> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> Am 20.05.2026 um 23:02 schrieb Norman Breau via dev < > >>>>>> [email protected]>: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> I believe a minor release is fine... they appear to be all > >>>>>>> fixes or > >>>>>>> general improvements in a non-breaking way. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The exception is > >>>>>>> <https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin- > >> inappbrowser/pull/1107> > >>>>>>> ) where > >>>>>>> it was noted as a breaking change but it was decided to be > >>>>>>> fine to be > >>>>>>> merged for a minor release due to the circumstances > >>>>>>> surrounding the > >>>>>>> issue. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, 2026-05-20 at 22:55 +0200, Niklas Merz wrote: > >>>>>>>> Hej folks, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> as discussed before we would like to do a release for the > >>>>>>>> IAB plugin. > >>>>>>>> Should the next release be a major (7.0.0) or minor > >> (6.1.0) > >>>>>>>> release? > >>>>>>>> The > >>>>>>>> version in master is currently pinned to 6.1.0. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> We have quite a lot of changes since the last release 3 > >>>>>>>> years ago. I > >>>>>>>> see > >>>>>>>> some deprecations and removal of old code. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> <<https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin>- > >>>>>>>> inappbrowser/compare/rel/6.0.0...master?expand=1> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Any outstanding patches to land? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Once we've decided on the release version Manuel and I > >> will > >>>>>>>> proceed > >>>>>>>> with > >>>>>>>> the release. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Kind regards > >>>>>>>> Niklas > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>>>>> -------- > >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- > >>>> -- > >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >>>> > >>>> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
