Looking at the proposed [1] roadmap [2] ....I'm not sure there's much left to break!!! (As in, I think we "done broke" all the things already.)
Feels like the consensus is that our focus in the coming months leading to 2x is to be: docs, tests, "hardening" the code and tools for managing the plugins themselves. [1] http://goo.gl/1yAjD [2] http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/RoadmapProjects On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:37 PM, Jesse <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with Fil, there is not that much that is broken with recent changes. > I think deprecation notices would be sufficient, and we can maintain those > interfaces until 2.0. ( in the past I think we were too quick with > deprecating and destroying ) > IMHO maintaining 2 branches would make life worse, not better. ( for our > users, not just us ) > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Patrick Mueller <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 14:44, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Before we put this to a vote, I'd like to hear a precise description >> > of the methodology being proposed. Right now I envision 'huge merge >> > rebase hell' but maybe I'm making a mountain of a molehill. >> > >> >> Fair enough. And I understand your concern. >> >> I'll write up a proposal on the wiki, and post a new top-level thread on >> the m/l when I got something. >> >> -- >> Patrick Mueller >> http://muellerware.org >>
