The issue is the that stated methodology for getting the right versions to test is: * for release, get plugins from the master branch and platforms, tests etc from the release branch (3.0.x) * for tip of tree, get plugins from the dev branch and platforms, tests etc from the master branch Since the rename was done to the plugins on master (appropriate for 3.1.x) that no longer leaves a place to get plugins that are 'compatible' with 3.0.x
The issue that I am pointing out right now is that the file: cordova-mobile-spec/dependencies-plugin/plugin.xml explicitly names the plugins with the old name in the 3.0.x branch of mobile-spec. so it breaks. If a developer has a similar references to their 3.0.x plugins, it will also fail next time they build a fresh new project. For CI it means that all tests of the 3.0.x branch now fail. On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Marcel Kinard <cmarc...@gmail.com> wrote: > In the past I've used #3. When checking out code to test, I try to get all > the assets from the same branch / time period. But I may be skewed in that > approach, since our product that embeds Cordova has a snapshot of the > platforms and plugins, and doesn't get updates from the online repos. > > Does what you are saying infer that the rename of the plugins is a > breaking change? And needs to have some verbage in the Upgrading guides? > > On Oct 1, 2013, at 11:14 AM, David Kemp <drk...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > Summary: Due to the renaming of plugins, there is no longer a sensible > way > > to test 3.0.x > > > > Detail: > > The process to test 3.0.x is to get platforms, mobile-spec, etc from > 3.0.x > > and plugins from master. With the change on plugin names (remove core) > the > > 3.0.x mobile-spec still refers to the names with core , but the master > > branch of the plugins no longer have that name. > > > > Possible resolutions: > > 1) never mind - mobilespec for 3.0.x is broken, it will be fixed in 3.1.x > > 2) cherrypick the change to mobilespec dependencies back to 3.0.x > > 3) find some other way to get the older plugins available to test. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > David Kemp > >
