To be clear, this is just referring to Cordova CLI versions 3.0.0 - 3.0.4, I think. By version 3.0.5, CLI had a dependency on plugman 0.10.0, which included the "plugman-registry" branch. (We didn't push anything to the registry until 3.1 was released, but we made sure that the infrastructure was ready a while before).
If it is possible to use later versions of cordova-cli on a project that uses Cordova 3.0 engines, then we should be clear that we're not breaking Cordova 3.0 projects; just the oldest versions of the CLI, which developers should be encouraged to upgrade in any case. On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:00 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> wrote: > Didn't know about npm deprecate. Makes sense to me! > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Can we deprecate version 3.0? > > https://www.npmjs.org/doc/cli/npm-deprecate.html > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> +1 as well. This will break Cordova 3.0 though. Cordova versions >= 3.1 > are > >> fine because they support registries. Cordova 3.0 only supports git and > can > >> only fetch from master branches. > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > +1 > >> > > >> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:30 AM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > +1++ > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Steven Gill < > stevengil...@gmail.com > >> > >wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> +1! > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:02 AM, James Jong <wjamesj...@gmail.com > > > >> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > +1 Making it easier and less confusing for our new contributors > is > >> > good. > >> > >> > -James Jong > >> > >> > > >> > >> > On Apr 22, 2014, at 12:07 PM, Andrew Grieve < > agri...@chromium.org> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > +1! Certainly it's causing us a lot of pain still. Moving to > >> > releasing > >> > >> > off > >> > >> > > of master seems like it would work fine. It's been working fine > >> for > >> > >> > > CLI/plugman, and they move much faster. > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Braden Shepherdson < > >> > >> > bra...@chromium.org>wrote: > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > >> We originally needed the plugin releases to be on the master > >> branch > >> > >> > because > >> > >> > >> there was no way to have CLI/Plugman fetch from other > branches. > >> > That > >> > >> is > >> > >> > no > >> > >> > >> longer the case. Further, you're correct that the registry's > >> > tarballs > >> > >> is > >> > >> > >> the primary source now. Even if someone does have a git > >> dependency > >> > >> > >> somewhere, they can specify a branch (actually any ref) in the > >> > >> > <dependency> > >> > >> > >> tag. Likewise the command line. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> I'm all for moving development into the master branch. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Braden > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Bryan Higgins < > >> > >> br...@bryanhiggins.net > >> > >> > >>> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> +1 > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> I think the registry has been around for long enough that the > >> vast > >> > >> > >> majority > >> > >> > >>> of users won't be installing directly from git. > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Ian Clelland < > >> > >> iclell...@chromium.org > >> > >> > >>>> wrote: > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >>>> I totally agree that we should do this. > >> > >> > >>>> > >> > >> > >>>> I think that once the current plugin release is complete, I > can > >> > set > >> > >> up > >> > >> > >>> the > >> > >> > >>>> branches so that the master branch is for development, and > we > >> > can go > >> > >> > >> from > >> > >> > >>>> there. > >> > >> > >>>> > >> > >> > >>>> Is it a requirement that plugins be tagged in git for npm to > >> > >> function? > >> > >> > >> I > >> > >> > >>>> thought that the plugins were uploaded, zipped, to our couch > >> > server, > >> > >> > >> for > >> > >> > >>>> each release, and that there was no further communication > with > >> > the > >> > >> git > >> > >> > >>>> repository? It shouldn't be a problem to go back and make > sure > >> > >> they're > >> > >> > >>>> properly tagged, but I'm just wondering if it's still a > >> > necessity. > >> > >> > >>>> > >> > >> > >>>> Ian > >> > >> > >>>> > >> > >> > >>>> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 9:27 PM, Jesse < > >> purplecabb...@gmail.com> > >> > >> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> I am seeing more and more pull requests that aren't easy > >> merges > >> > >> > >> because > >> > >> > >>>>> people are starting their work from the master branch, and > not > >> > dev. > >> > >> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> We discussed *a long time ago* that at some point, we would > >> > >> consider > >> > >> > >>>> master > >> > >> > >>>>> to be the bleeding edge of each plugin, and we could then > get > >> > rid > >> > >> of > >> > >> > >>> the > >> > >> > >>>>> dev branches. The requirements to make this possible > >> included, > >> > >> > >> using a > >> > >> > >>>>> branch/tag for every npm release of the plugin, and making > >> sure > >> > >> that > >> > >> > >>>> plugin > >> > >> > >>>>> dependencies were correctly mapped. > >> > >> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> Has anyone given this any more thought, and do we have any > >> idea > >> > >> when > >> > >> > >> we > >> > >> > >>>>> will make the switch? > >> > >> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> Cheers, > >> > >> > >>>>> Jesse > >> > >> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>>> @purplecabbage > >> > >> > >>>>> risingj.com > >> > >> > >>>>> > >> > >> > >>>> > >> > >> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > > >> >
