On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Joe Bowser wrote:
>
> So, are we going to do a 2.9.1? Should I be going through all the
> plugins and making sure that everything is backported?
>
I like the idea of releasing 2.9.1 close to Cordova 3.1 -- could we
continue with that up to 2.9.5 with Cordova 3.5?
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Ian Clelland wrote:
> We should be supporting 2.9 -- I'm pretty sure we've committed to at least
> fixing bugs as they come up.
>
We've committed to it, but to be honest, I stopped doing the backports
when I heard there wasn't going to be a 2.9.1 release, because
will continue to support 2.x
> > in a
> > > > > > long lived branch."
> > > > > > http://phonegap.com/blog/2013/06/20/coming-soon-phonegap30/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > At the time it seemed quite clear there would be a 2.9.1, b
onegap.com/blog/2013/06/20/coming-soon-phonegap30/
> > > > >
> > > > > At the time it seemed quite clear there would be a 2.9.1, but now
> it
> > is
> > > > > not clear at all...
> > > > >
> > > > > Peter
> > >
uld be a 2.9.1, but now it
> is
> > > > not clear at all...
> > > >
> > > > Peter
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of
> Michal
> &g
gt; > >
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal
> > > Mocny
> > > Sent: Friday, 27 September 2013 5:24 AM
> > > To: dev; bows...@apache.org
&
med quite clear there would be a 2.9.1, but now it is
> > not clear at all...
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal
> > Mocny
> > Sent: Friday, 27 September 2013 5:24 AM
>
---Original Message-
> From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal
> Mocny
> Sent: Friday, 27 September 2013 5:24 AM
> To: dev; bows...@apache.org
> Subject: Re: 2.9.0 Support
>
> Sounds less than ideal to have to backport, given that we still support
>
We should continue to do this for defects for the time being.
On Sep 26, 2013 9:17 PM, "Joe Bowser" wrote:
> Hey
>
> What did we agree to for supporting the old 2.9.x branch? I'm just
> wondering, since we're still getting tons of bugs filed against that.
> While most of them are valid in 3.0.x,
We should be supporting 2.9 -- I'm pretty sure we've committed to at least
fixing bugs as they come up.
We never discussed whether we would *only* be fixing things that were
reported on the 2.9 branch, or whether we were going to test the issues
that were reported on 3.x and backport the fixes. I
dev; bows...@apache.org
Subject: Re: 2.9.0 Support
Sounds less than ideal to have to backport, given that we still support
the old workflow with 3.0.
However, I think we did discuss keeping 2.9 maintained while we iron out
3.0 issues. I think we should drop 2.9 as soon as users run out of
*vali
Sounds less than ideal to have to backport, given that we still support the
old workflow with 3.0.
However, I think we did discuss keeping 2.9 maintained while we iron out
3.0 issues. I think we should drop 2.9 as soon as users run out of *valid*
reasons for not upgrading to 3.0, right?
What do
12 matches
Mail list logo
