Don't we have to release a zip on an Apache server because of "The Apache Way"? That's why I thought we had to release artifacts, not for people, but for process.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > I don't mind this but it seems like a lot of work to release artifacts > for...who? End users we want to encourage to use the tooling golden > path for creating projects, working w/ plugins, etc. > > If anything I'd rather we *only* distribute cordova-cli as the > canonical repo and entry point for usage and treat the rest as our > project build artifacts/ephemera. > > Way easier. Way more in tune w/ actual usage. > > > > On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 7:25 AM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> wrote: >> Definitely would like to get everything Release / Versioning related >> documented on the wiki. The most complete source right now is: >> http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CuttingReleases We should add another page >> for versioning once we settle on what to do with plugins. >> >> Right now only CLI & Plugman are distributed on npm and are versioned >> separately. Nothing else is on npm though, so package.json isn't used. >> Instead VERSION files hold the version. >> >> I've decided I didn't like my previous proposal of not updating versions >> when things don't change because it will make it harder to check out a >> version of Cordova. >> >> New Proposal: >> >> 1. Each Cordova release will include: >> - A copy of every repo, including all core plugins. >> >> 2. Each plugin repo will get a release branch even if the code hasn't >> changed. >> >> 3. Each plugin's version will match the Cordova version >> >> 4. Plugins can have separate point releases if they are important updates >> to them. These will be in the form of tags along the release branch. >> >> 5. As soon as release branches are created, we change the VERSION file and >> re-tag master to a -dev version of the next release (e.g. 3.1.0-dev) >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> Dumb questions >>> >>> Does the package.json {version:""} field needs to be updated on every >>> commit to the repo? >>> (meaning depending what is the commit, then the major, minor, patch, or >>> extension gets updated) >>> Does the npm registry support pre-release and build metadata (i.e. x.7.z.92 >>> in 2.9.1-x.7.z.92)? >>> If this true, Does npm knows to install the latest stable version, but user >>> can request a pre-release by specifying the version that it wants @2 >>> .9.1-x.7.z.92 >>> >>> >>> >>> Refs: >>> http://semver.org/ >>> >>> Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the: >>> >>> 1. MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes, >>> 2. MINOR version when you add functionality in a backwards-compatible >>> manner, and >>> 3. PATCH version when you make backwards-compatible bug fixes. >>> >>> *Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as >>> extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format.* >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com >>> >wrote: >>> >>> > About versioning maybe we should open a mail-thread/jira/wikipage (not >>> > familiar with process yet :-)) >>> > To discuss and be clear what is the guideline/process to version >>> different >>> > components. >>> > >>> > Some thoughts (maybe this is already well understood and documented in >>> > wiki): >>> > - Lets follow semantic versioning as much as possible for ALL components >>> > (i.e. plugins, core, cli, plugman, platform, repos) >>> > - Document the deliverables/releases channels (i.e. npm, apache zip/dist, >>> > git repo) >>> > - Maintain the versions in sync (package.json {version:""}, git tag) >>> > tag/hash should match what's posted in npm registry? >>> > >>> > --Carlos >>> > >>> > >>> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 7:33 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org >>> >wrote: >>> > >>> >> Coho started as just a tool to package, but has grown into a tool that: >>> >> a) helps work with multiple repos >>> >> b) documents our release process in working code. >>> >> >>> >> re windows tagging - As of the last release bug template, we're tagging >>> >> each branch individually either via coho or not, so no issue there. It >>> >> won't be tagged by coho unless someone does it explicitly. I think we >>> can >>> >> still use it to create the windows release branches, since if it messes >>> up >>> >> we can just fix what it missed (but all it does is update VERSION and >>> >> cordova.js). >>> >> >>> >> As for plugins, I've only used CLI by pointing at directories so far, >>> but >>> >> I >>> >> was under the impression that if you give it a URL, you have to give it >>> a >>> >> repo + subdirectory + hash/tag combination. If it's currently just >>> >> installing from master, I think that's a bad default and should instead >>> go >>> >> by a tag (npm goes by the "stable" tag by default I believe). So... we >>> >> will >>> >> need an explicit action for commits to a plugin to be picked up by >>> >> plugman. >>> >> >>> >> How about if a plugin has a commit that is urgent, it gets a point >>> release >>> >> right away. Otherwise, it waits for the next Cordova release cycle. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 6:47 PM, Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> > re: COHO >>> >> > I cannot guarantee the output of windows/phone releases if they are >>> >> tagged >>> >> > and updated via coho. I like the idea of having continuous >>> integration, >>> >> but >>> >> > this is not there yet. I would prefer for now to manually update and >>> >> tag >>> >> > wp7+wp8+windows8 repos because I do not currently trust the magic in >>> >> coho, >>> >> > and do not have time to go and understand all of the magic. >>> >> > >>> >> > @purplecabbage >>> >> > risingj.com >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> >>> >> > wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > > Plugin versioning is definitely something we need to discuss in >>> >> detail. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > What happens if I make a change to the camera plugin. Do I >>> immediately >>> >> > bump >>> >> > > the version? Probably not. But people who install it using >>> plugman/cli >>> >> > > after the change will get the latest one on master with no obvious >>> >> > > difference to them. Version wise it is the same as before the >>> change. >>> >> > This >>> >> > > feels wrong. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > We can now update plugins independently of our once a month release >>> >> and >>> >> > get >>> >> > > those updates to our users instantly. I think we should update the >>> >> > version >>> >> > > of the plugins after every change. Similar to node-modules on npm. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > Coho is not just for packaging. I love the fact that I can clone and >>> >> > update >>> >> > > all of the repos in a few quick commands. Coho seems to have the >>> >> ability >>> >> > to >>> >> > > do tagging, release packaging and signing, uploading releases to >>> >> apache, >>> >> > > cloning all repos and soon generating release issues on jira. It >>> will >>> >> be >>> >> > > important to solve all of the issues people are having with coho and >>> >> > > document what you can do with it. >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > > >>> >> > > > I'm going to create a new thread about this, but what's the >>> purpose >>> >> of >>> >> > > > coho again? I thought it was just for packaging releases. >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Andrew Grieve < >>> >> agri...@chromium.org> >>> >> > > > wrote: >>> >> > > > > Our intern Jeffrey is actively working on adding a command to >>> >> coho to >>> >> > > be >>> >> > > > > able to create release bugs (based off of cordova-labs). If he >>> >> gets >>> >> > > done, >>> >> > > > > by Monday, then it'll be a cinch to create the issues. >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > We could maybe start by discussing what we want to do with the >>> >> plugin >>> >> > > > repos >>> >> > > > > for the release. >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > Should they all have release branches? >>> >> > > > > Should they be versioned the same? e.g. 3.0.x, or should they >>> >> start >>> >> > out >>> >> > > > at >>> >> > > > > 1.0.x? >>> >> > > > > Are we including a .zip of all of them in our apache >>> distribution >>> >> > .zip? >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > Here's a stab at it from me: >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > - Always include all core plugins in the apache release .zip >>> >> > > > > - If a plugin has not changed since the previous release, then >>> >> just >>> >> > put >>> >> > > > in >>> >> > > > > the previous release of the .zip. >>> >> > > > > - E.g. for 3.1.0, if plugin-console has no changes, then just >>> >> > > package >>> >> > > > > version 3.0.0 of the plugin in the release >>> >> > > > > - Create release branches for the plugin repos only if there has >>> >> > been a >>> >> > > > > commit since the previous release >>> >> > > > > - If there were no commits, then there cannot be any >>> >> regressions, >>> >> > so >>> >> > > > no >>> >> > > > > need for a release branch. >>> >> > > > > - I think they should be versioned the same to help us figure >>> out >>> >> > when >>> >> > > > the >>> >> > > > > last change was. >>> >> > > > > - This could mean that if plugin-console goes three months >>> >> > without a >>> >> > > > > change, it will go from 3.0.0 straight to 3.3.0 >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > >> Yeah.. Maybe we should create the issues for the rc soon? >>> >> > > > >> >>> >> > > > >> On 7/10/13 1:57 PM, "Andrew Grieve" <agri...@chromium.org> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > > > >> >>> >> > > > >> >I would put that at next week unless someone has cycles to get >>> >> on >>> >> > it >>> >> > > > this >>> >> > > > >> >week. >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > > >> >On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Marcel Kinard < >>> >> cmarc...@gmail.com >>> >> > > >>> >> > > > >> wrote: >>> >> > > > >> > >>> >> > > > >> >> When will the Upgrade Guides (2.9 -> 3.0) be written? That >>> >> > content >>> >> > > is >>> >> > > > >> >> currently not in cordova-docs. >>> >> > > > >> >>> >> > > > >> >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Carlos Santana >>> > <csantan...@gmail.com> >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Carlos Santana >>> <csantan...@gmail.com> >>>
