On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 4:13 PM, Fischer, Paul A <paul.a.fisc...@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Michal, > > Thanks for the clarification. What you describe is what I expected, and I > totally understand the issues around trying to tightly specify what version > works where, getting independent plugin developers to follow through with > testing, etc. It's an impossible matrix to maintain. :( > > In essence, based on the process you outline, I am assuming something like > the following badly formatted timeline of releases: > > -- cordova X.Y release -- > Core Cordova plugins tested against are listed by individual version > (provided in release notes/blog) > Core Cordova plugin A gets updated > Core Cordova plugin B gets updated > Core Cordova plugin C gets updated > Core Cordova plugin A gets updated > Core Cordova plugin D gets updated > Core Cordova plugin A gets updated > ...etc. > -- cordova X.Z release -- > Core Cordova plugins tested against are listed (provided in release > notes/blog) > ...similar to above > ...etc. > -- cordova Y.A release -- > > So one can generally "assume" that those core plugin versions listed in > the release notes of a Cordova framework, up to those versions listed in > the next Cordova framework release are "safe" to use with the immediately > preceding release of the framework. > I think thats a good conservative conclusion to make. In practice, newer plugin updates are quite compatible with older platform versions and often contain valuable fixes -- but you probably don't want to assume that by default. > > I ask only because our users are not all sophisticated Cordova users (I > represent Intel and the XDK) and trying to come up with some general > guidelines. They are limited to the Cordova CLI versions that we provide > build support for, so they can't just update the CLI to meet the needs of a > specific plugin. > Fair enough. We've also toyed with community supplied metadata -- where you can flag a plugin as *not* working, and assume it works unless it is flagged. This would shift the burden over to the community / testers, instead of the plugin authors. But this was just brainstorming, there is no work on this yet. (I bring it up in case this appeals to you as a project). > > Thanks for the quick replies, sorry mine was so long in coming, > > Paul > > -----Original Message----- > From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal > Mocny > Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 09:00 > To: dev > Subject: Re: 3.6 cordova plugin versions > > Paul: > > You are right. When we do a platform release, we test with the latest > plugins to make sure the platform isn't breaking things. When we do a > plugins release, we test with the latest platforms to make sure the plugins > are breaking things. > > In theory, we should know when plugins depend on a certain minimum > platform version, and even have a plugin.xml tag to specify this > (<engine>), though its a bit indirect and in practice I'm not sure that the > requirements are well specified (many plugins just say >= 3.0.0). > > > I think whether you consider this a problem depends a bit on your workflow > and cordova development philosophy. Namely, do you make any native > platform changes directly in platforms/? If so, upgrading to the latest of > everything all the time is a burden, and you may want well specified > compatibility. On the other hand, if your platforms/ are treated as build > artefacts, and all your work is in hooks/ plugins/ and www/, its quite > trivial to upgrade platforms, sample different plugin versions, and > experiment. > > In theory, we want to support both flows. In practice, its quite tedious > and relies on plugin authors to put in the legwork, which doesn't usually > happen. If you were interested in testing plugins on older cordova > platform versions, or perhaps you already maintain a list, that would be > useful to share with us. However long term, I'd personally prefer to see > people less hesitant to just upgrade often, and that has certainly been the > trend. > > -Michal > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 11:48 AM, Ray Camden <rayca...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > Just being annoying. ;) I can see this type of question though being > > something users will bring up. > > > > On 9/30/14, 9:46 AM, "Shazron" <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >He didnt ask that question, but Ray: yes. > > > > > >On Tuesday, September 30, 2014, Ray Camden <rayca...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Does it make sense to clarify that statement though? Not *every* > > >>plugin is tested like this, just the ³Core² set of Cordova plugins. > > >>If someone has a random plugin for Cowbell, there is no guarantee > > >>that it will work on _any_ release, right? (I know we were talking > > >>about core plugins, but I just wanted to be sure.) > > >> > > >> > > >> On 9/30/14, 9:04 AM, "Shazron" <shaz...@gmail.com <javascript:;>> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> > > > > > >
