On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We will need to add issues for tagging plugins. What's your reasoning? > I can create the issue and > tag the plugins. I figure for now, plugins will use same tagging process as > other repos. > And that process is? For the RC - it's trivial to create release branches and an RC tag. coho can do it in bulk. The main question is what criteria should we use to determine whether a plugin is ready for tagging? For an RC, we could just tag with whatever's there , but then it's not really adding any meaning on top of the release branch existing. I think the thing that separates the release branch from the tag is some testing. > > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > Created the issues: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-4208 > > > > On 7/15/13 11:56 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >So, for tagging today, can we get the issues setup and the JS tagged > > >at least? We can somehow muddle through this RC1. > > > > > >On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > > >> I'd say we could consider the core plugins as build ephemera not > > >> unlike docs or automations. Really cordova-cli is the main point of > > >> interaction between us and our developer community. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> > > >>wrote: > > >>> The Apache Way was a part of what I was thinking as well. > > >>> > > >>> Also - it occurs to me that we'll have to change our voting system > > >>>when it > > >>> comes to plugins since each plugin repo should have a +1 from each > > >>>platform > > >>> maintainer, and can be tagged only once. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 12:53 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> 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> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> > > > > >
