I called it cordova-3.1.x because it's about the 3.1.x version of Cordova, the CadVer, not the CLI's own version numbering. We can always make a new branch and drop the old one, if we like.
Braden On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> wrote: > the branch for both CLI and Plugman is called cordova-3.1.x (don't know why > we didn't call it 3.1.x instead) > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Jeffrey Heifetz <jheif...@blackberry.com > >wrote: > > > It seems as though there is no cordova-cli 3.1.x branch, does this mean > we > > always release off of master? > > > > There is a bug I found where element tree needs to be bumped to the same > > version as plugman to support namespace xml elements and I'd like to know > > where to push this. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jeff > > > > On 13-10-01 12:17 PM, "Steven Gill" <stevengil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >Firefoxos is broken on master after the refactor. It works fine on the > > >cordova-3.1.x branch though. > > > > > >I am testing jesse's pull requests for CLI + plugman today for > > >cordova-3.1.x branch. If they look good I will merge them in. We should > > >release CLI + Plugman at the same time as 3.1.0. The release should be > > >based off cordova-3.1.x branch and not master. > > >On Oct 1, 2013 7:41 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <agri...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > >> Braden's out doing intern interviews yesterday & today, so it's > unlikely > > >> he'll see this email until tomorrow if not Thursday. > > >> > > >> We could still do a tools release, but just don't update the > > >>platforms.js > > >> file to point at 3.1.0. That said, I think I saw Firefox was broken on > > >> HEAD? Think we'll want to fix that before doing so. > > >> > > >> In terms of testing the RC - as Steven said - using cordova@3.0.10 > > >>should > > >> do the trick > > >> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 2:22 AM, Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >> > > >> > I have an open pull request I would like someone else to look at. > [1] > > >> > This addresses the issue that Carlos brought up during plugin remove > > >>[2] > > >> > It would be great if this could be part of the release, or at least > > >>the > > >> > commit cherry picked into it. > > >> > > > >> > Cheers, > > >> > Jesse > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > [1] > > >> > https://github.com/purplecabbage/cordova-plugman/pull/2 > > >> > [2] > > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-4943 > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > @purplecabbage > > >> > risingj.com > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Steven Gill < > stevengil...@gmail.com> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > I believe Braden did the same type of release for plugman that he > > >>did > > >> for > > >> > > cordova cli. He updated both packages on npm but set the latest > tag > > >>to > > >> > > point to the previous version until we were ready to do our full > > >> release. > > >> > > > > >> > > If you install the CLI RC > > >> > > sudo npm install -g cordova@3.0.10, you actually get version > 0.12.0 > > >>of > > >> > > plugman as a dependency. > > >> > > > > >> > > I will wait for Braden to chime in. I figure the CLI and Plugman > > >>should > > >> > > both be released on the same day we release 3.1.0. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 1:39 PM, David Kemp <drk...@google.com> > > >>wrote: > > >> > > > > >> > > > +1 to a plugman npm release. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > David Kemp > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Steven Gill > > >><stevengil...@gmail.com > > >> > > > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Anyone see any issue with me doing a npm plugman release > today? > > >> > Testing > > >> > > > the > > >> > > > > CLI RC is kind of weird when the plugman dependency is > > >> incompatible. > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > -Steve > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential > > information, privileged material (including material protected by the > > solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute > non-public > > information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the > intended > > recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, > > please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from > > your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this > > transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be > unlawful. > > > > >
