Agree with your points Carlos. We should make issues for some of this.
Would love to see a cordova outdated command.
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Carlos Santana
wrote:
> I'm back from vacation, sorry I missed all the fun on version numbering :-)
>
> +1 on 4.x for CLI
>
> Things I see as to
I'm back from vacation, sorry I missed all the fun on version numbering :-)
+1 on 4.x for CLI
Things I see as to continue to enhance.
- Better explain each component and how they relate (in function and
dependency) on the website/docs
- Put some of the brains into the cli to better illustrate a
Pull request has been merged. Thanks for the feedback.
On Oct 14, 2014, at 3:03 AM, Steven Gill wrote:
> Lgtm! Ship!
>
> I'll point to it in the blog post.
>
> On Monday, October 13, 2014, Marcel Kinard wrote:
>
>> After all this discussion, it's a bit unclear to me where we are currently
>>
Lgtm! Ship!
I'll point to it in the blog post.
On Monday, October 13, 2014, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> After all this discussion, it's a bit unclear to me where we are currently
> at. So I took a shot at capturing it in writing it for coho/docs/
> versioning-and-release-strategy.md.
>
> https://git
Thanks Marcel, doc spells things out very clearly.
On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> After all this discussion, it's a bit unclear to me where we are currently
> at. So I took a shot at capturing it in writing it for coho/docs/
> versioning-and-release-strategy.md.
>
> http
After all this discussion, it's a bit unclear to me where we are currently at.
So I took a shot at capturing it in writing it for
coho/docs/versioning-and-release-strategy.md.
https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/pull/53
I intend this to be the "Current State" of the discussion, not the "End
>>versions are out.
> > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >Cordova info should also dump what
> > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > >versions
> of
> > >> > plugins
> > >> > > >> you
&g
> >> > > > > > > >the next couple hours, otherwise we move forward.
> > >> > > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > >> > > > > > > >@pu
t; > >> > > > (All IMO of course, happy to follow the wisdom of the
> >>crowd on
> >> > > >>this
> >> > > >> one.)
> >> > > >> > > > On Oct 10, 2014 9:29 AM, "Micha
>> > > >> > > > On Oct 10, 2014 9:29 AM, "Michal Mocny"
>>
>> > > >>wrote:
>> > > >> > > >
>> > > >> > > > > 5 is also fine.
>> > > >> > > > >
>> >
gt;>wrote:
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > > 5 is also fine.
> > > >> > > > >
> > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Brian LeRoux
> > > >>wrote:
> > > >> > &g
> >
> > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Brian LeRoux
> > >>wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > I am against it. Its not going to achieve the goal of
> > >>alleviating
> > &
gt;> > > > > > 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
> >> &
> >>alleviating
> >> > > > > > confusion. People see the CLI as the version not the
> >>platforms.
> >> I'd
> >> > > > > rather
> >> > > > > > we went to 5 if anything.
> >> > > >
gt; 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:
>> >
t; > strongly
> > > > > > > >> > about calling it something the vote could be cancelled !!
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > On 10/9/14, 2:41 PM, "Chuck Lantz"
> > > >
> > > panar...@microsoft.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I meant tag and start the vote for the next release :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10/9/14, 3:01 PM, "Chuck Lantz" wrote:
> > > > > >
>
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
rasimhan (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" w
forward, it doesn't seem as if that should matter.
>
> Leo
>
> -Original Message-
> From: brian.ler...@gmail.com [mailto:brian.ler...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> Brian LeRoux
> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2014 9:49 AM
> To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> Subject: Re: In
wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >+1
> > > > >
> > > > >-Chuck
> > > > >
> > > > >-Original Message-
> > > > >From: Jesse [mailto:purplecabb...@gmail.com]
> > > > >Sent: Thursday, October
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
> *
ssage-
From: brian.ler...@gmail.com [mailto:brian.ler...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Brian
LeRoux
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2014 9:49 AM
To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
As is 4.
This is more of an outreach, marketing, blogging, tweeting, etc pr
> On 10/9/14, 3:01 PM, "Chuck Lantz" wrote:
> > >
> > > >+1
> > > >
> > > >-Chuck
> > > >
> > > >-Original Message-----
> > > >From: Jesse [mailto:purplecabb...@gmail.com]
> > > >Se
t; >
> > >-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 t
t tag and start the vote for the next release :)
>
> On 10/9/14, 3:01 PM, "Chuck Lantz" wrote:
>
> >+1
> >
> >-Chuck
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Jesse [mailto:purplecabb...@gmail.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, October 9, 2014 2:55
>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
ows 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: Indepen
+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
ependent 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 Moc
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
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
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 tow
ese 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
;>> 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
>>> independent
. 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: Indepen
t 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: In
ck
-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
: 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
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Michal Mocny wrote:
> 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.
> -
Michal Mocny wrote:
>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 vers
or
> something".
>
> Thanks,
> Leo
>
> -Original Message-
> From: 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 platf
Leo wrote:
>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
mo...@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
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 rese
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_23HiTl4IK0jsM4NlmGy5kbLsPIW3SnOsUEIQ?authuser=0&hl=en
See you in 30 minutes.
+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 wrote:
> Is the expec
Sounds good! I'll definitely try to make it back for that. Have to be at
the dmv this morning. Should be back by 2est
On Wednesday, October 8, 2014, Michal Mocny 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,
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 mos
Michal Mocny wrote:
> Its looking like 3:00 PM EST Tomorrow or 12:00 PM EST Thursday is the
>best
> fit -- but some contributors whose opinions I'm interested in have yet to
> fill out the form (looking at you Brian, Jesse, Joe).
Thursday is Sukkot, I'm unavailable.
Thanks Brian.
Its looking like 3:00 PM EST Tomorrow or 12:00 PM EST Thursday is the best
fit -- but some contributors whose opinions I'm interested in have yet to
fill out the form (looking at you Brian, Jesse, Joe).
-Michal
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Brian LeRoux wrote:
> This doc is a r
:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal Mocny
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 5:29 PM
To: Smith, Peter
Cc:dev@cordova.apache.org
Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
Just got through this thread. Summarizing Proposals:
(a) CLI moves to v10.0.0, and version numbers increment at same ra
This doc is a really great summary: thank you Michal (and everyone else for
the input). Super agree with starting from positive goals Marcel.
I've been asking around other Apache projects (Jackrabbit and Sling) and
the Gentoo Linux guys. This problem is hard. The good news is: we're not
the only o
On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Michal Mocny wrote:
> "Do not confuse developers" goal hopefully covers your points about
> communication and information
It partially covers it.
To be more explicit, I'm trying to turn a negative goal into a positive goal.
So instead of "how do we not mess this u
From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal Mocny
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 11:25 AM
To: Treggiari, Leo
Cc: Michal Mocny; Marcel Kinard; dev
Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
> I don't think its a goal for us developers, but I understand
e the way to strive to solve that is to simplify upgrades, not make
it easier to ignore them.
>
> Leo
>
> -Original Message-
> From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal
> Mocny
> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 11:14 AM
> To: Marcel Kinard
From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal Mocny
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 11:14 AM
To: Marcel Kinard
Cc: dev
Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
Marcel, I added the goal for "latest-and-greatest" which is a good idea. I
think your other goals are
Marcel, I added the goal for "latest-and-greatest" which is a good idea. I
think your other goals are already covered with what's there. Again, I
wanted to be brief. "Do not confuse developers" goal hopefully covers your
points about communication and information (and going into detail is
imposi
Yes, creating a doc is a great next step to solving this. Thanks for doing that.
Now that there is a doc to read, I think the goals are wrong. I suggest the
following:
- enable releases to happen at a faster pace and lower cost
- enable users to easily obtain the latest-and-greatest
- clearly co
rious
>> 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:
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
&
[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.
h
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 wrote:
> +dev list again :P
>
> The timez
oogle.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 knowl
+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 wrote:
> What timezone is this meant for?
>
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Michal Mocny wrote:
>
>> Here is a doodle for th
OK, let's try this again:
What time zone is this mean for?
BTW: Can we get that fixed?
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Michal Mocny 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
>
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 to
> (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. Pl
_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?
> >
> >
s 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
...@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 b
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. Ve
erstand 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 summa
t;
>
>
> Leo
>
>
>
> *From:* agri...@google.com [mailto:agri...@google.com] *On Behalf Of *Andrew
> Grieve
> *Sent:* Monday, October 06, 2014 12:12 PM
> *To:* Treggiari, Leo
> *Cc:* Andrew Grieve; Brian LeRoux; dev@cordova.apache.org; Marcel Kinard
>
> *Subject:*
@cordova.apache.org; Marcel Kinard
Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
Leo - that was a very well thought out summary of the state of things! I agree
that from a user perspective, it would be easier to understand and reason about
things if platform versions corresponded to things that
oid 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 ver
+1
On Oct 3, 2014, at 8:05 PM, Steven Gill wrote:
> Looking through peoples responses on this thread and the project version
> thread, many people have been pushing for a bigger jump in version number for
> the CLI.
>
> Chatting with Shaz, he is very concerned about support issues coming in
che.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
lemented. 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 exp
e 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
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
;> 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
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 Messa
> 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...
> >
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
ions 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 pla
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 tech
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Steven Gill wrote:
> Thanks for feedback!
>
> I like the idea of giving our early adopters a chance to try it out and
> help us catch bugs, but I think that should be what RCs are for (3 day
> window while voting is ongoing).
>
> How do we handle cases where the bu
Traditionally, Cordova has had major version bump close to Phonegap day -
> > If we continue this to be 3.7.0, will we have another release close to
> > Phonegap day, calling that 4.0 ?
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: brian.ler...@gmail.com [mailto:
&
Thanks for feedback!
I like the idea of giving our early adopters a chance to try it out and
help us catch bugs, but I think that should be what RCs are for (3 day
window while voting is ongoing).
How do we handle cases where the bump in platform is accompanied by a
change in cordova-lib. The nex
I don't think it's necessary to bump CLI major when platforms bump major.
Platforms and CLI are linked only superficially anyways.
What do you think about:
1. Release platform
2. Blog post telling people to try it out using CLI platform add@new_version
3. After a week, bump the default platform in
Great write-up! Totally onboard. And like the suggestion of bumping the
major (I say either 4.0 or 10.0).
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:58 PM, Brian LeRoux wrote:
> I'm down with jumping to 4.x but not convinced a jump to 5.x would actually
> spur more understanding. (Also thanks for tackling this St
mail.com] On Behalf Of
> Brian LeRoux
> Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2014 12:58 PM
> To: Steven Gill
> Cc: Shazron; dev@cordova.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
>
> I'm down with jumping to 4.x but not convinced a jump to 5.x would
> actu
...@gmail.com [mailto:brian.ler...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Brian
LeRoux
Sent: Thursday, October 2, 2014 12:58 PM
To: Steven Gill
Cc: Shazron; dev@cordova.apache.org
Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
I'm down with jumping to 4.x but not convinced a jump to 5.x would actually
spur
I'm down with jumping to 4.x but not convinced a jump to 5.x would actually
spur more understanding. (Also thanks for tackling this Steve.)
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 9:00 PM, Steven Gill wrote:
> I'm not opposed to a big version jump. It would draw attention to the fact
> that we are changing our v
I'm not opposed to a big version jump. It would draw attention to the fact
that we are changing our versioning & releasing process. How do others feel?
-Steve
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Shazron wrote:
> Thanks Steve for writing that up.
> I can definitely see the confusion in messaging, e
Thanks Steve for writing that up.
I can definitely see the confusion in messaging, especially at the start of
this new process.
So for "2) CLI + Lib version" I am proposing a radical idea (à la Windows
10) where we jump to a new version totally separate from the current 3.x
series to further detac
97 matches
Mail list logo
