I’ll have to admit that this seems a bit weird. That is, independent versions
of the CLI and platforms, with a “Cordova release” named “something” – e.g. a
date?
Imagine a user wants to know whether the new whitelist entry in config.xml is
supported in the versions of CLI and platforms that they have – assuming they
understand the distinction between the CLI and platforms to begin with. They
use some command to list the versions of the “things” (CLI and platforms) they
have installed. They go to the individual documentation of the “things” and
try to figure it out.
The way the Cordova documentation works today is nice with the combo box where
I can select a Cordova version – 3.6.0, 3.5.0, ... What would the combo box
contain in the new versioning scheme and how many entries would there be? Are
the answers “dates” and “lots of dates”? Or would there be no Cordova version
documentation other than an explanation of how to get the list of “things” you
currently have and where to find the documentation on them.
To “pin” or not to “pin.
Note that, to me, the pinning choice defines what happens when I use “cordova
{plugin | platform} add foo” with no specific version specified.
I’ve understood, so far at least, that plugins are not pinned (an add always
fetches something) and platforms are pinned to a CLI version (an add tells the
CLI that I will be using that platform (already installed) for this project).
Everything I have read which includes 1 book and the on-line project
documentation, suggest that, even if not stating it explicitly. E.g. plugins
talk about “fetching” and platforms don’t. There is a way to fetch a specific
version of platform support. That’s good and if I do that it is up to me to
understand the compatibility of the specific version I requested.
Is this true? If so then the npm cordova behavior seems weird. That is, if I
“npm install cordova” I get a set of pinned platforms. If I “npm update
cordova”, I get a new CLI and nothing else – i.e. not the platforms that were
pinned to that version of the CLI?
Should the plugin and platform ‘pin’ behavior be the same?
Should both be pinned? Some may find this alternative “blasphemous” but the
core plugin versions tested with a version of the CLI could be pinned to the
version of the CLI.
Should both not be pinned? It would be more consistent and if users are OK
with plugins being unpinned, why not platforms?
But maybe plugins and platforms are different. Plugins are purely run-time
code. Platforms are primarily tooling with some run-time code. Does that
difference make the current pinning behavior the best choice.
Maybe, but personally I would prefer both to be pinned – i.e. I install a
version of Cordova, and until I update it, every time I add a platform or
‘core’ plugin, I get the same thing.
Leo
From: mmo...@google.com [mailto:mmo...@google.com] On Behalf Of Michal Mocny
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 1:47 PM
To: Treggiari, Leo
Cc: Michal Mocny; Marcel Kinard; dev
Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
With this direction, there is no single number. Users should not functionally
care about CLI version, so there will just be the platform versions that
matter, really.
Downstreams can of course put labels on combinations of versions, so "PhoneGap
4" may be Android 4, iOS 3.8, and etc.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Treggiari, Leo
<leo.treggi...@intel.com<mailto:leo.treggi...@intel.com>> wrote:
> Did I miss anything?
I don't think we closed on this (I had to leave the meeting a little early) but
a remaining question is how to version what we (and users) call "Cordova".
Assuming a "Cordova" version is a point in time collection of the latest CLI
version + platform versions + plugin versions. Is the Cordova version semver
(using what algorithm with respect to its contained components) or is that what
you meant by ""latest as of Oct 2014" or something".
Thanks,
Leo
-----Original Message-----
From: mmo...@google.com<mailto:mmo...@google.com>
[mailto:mmo...@google.com<mailto:mmo...@google.com>] On Behalf Of Michal Mocny
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 1:13 PM
To: Michal Mocny
Cc: Marcel Kinard; dev
Subject: Re: Independent platform release summary
Thanks everyone for participation in what was a long and grueling
discussion.
Summary of current proposal:
- Cad-ver is dead.
- Everything moves Sem-ver, with platforms continuing from current versions
and diverging over time.
- CLI potentially gets a significant version bump to showcase this reset
(to 5.0 or 10.0, not yet settled)
- Pinning default platform versions *will* continue for the time being, but
it will be trivial to override the default.
- Platforms will have CLI <engine> tag equivalent (unclear yet if as node
peerDependency or otherwise) so devs will know when they need to
upgrade/downgrade CLI for non-default platform versions.
- After a platform update, eventually CLI will release to "pin" the new
default, and bump its PATCH/MINOR version (unless CLI had a functional
update at same time that requires a larger bump).
- After you update CLI, your existing projects don't change & platform
upgrades remain explicit, but you will now get warnings if your installed
platforms are older than the CLI pinned versions.
- Event MAJOR changes to platforms are not MAJOR updates to the CLI, unless
there is an actual breaking change to the CLI tool (i.e. new CLI will no
longer work with the currently installed platform).
- Platform and CLI docs have to split out and be released & versioned
alongside each (like plugins). Cross references from one to the other will
only be needed in a few places.
Note: The CLI-Platform compatibility story is functionally no different
than we have today. If you upgrade your CLI and there is a breaking
change, you will have to re-create your projects or downgrade CLI again.
Now we plan to be more explicit about it and offer warnings.
Note: There is no concept of a "fancy-pants" release other than to say
"latest as of Oct 2014" or something. Platforms don't have a single common
set of functionality, so CadVer was somewhat misleading already in that
sense. We could introduce a concept of "API Level" for exec bridge or
something for use by plugins, but not sure that has value.
What wasn't covered that came to mind after the fact:
- When there is an update available for CLI, should we give a warning to
update? (this is useful, but isn't common for npm modules. I think we
already do this from plugman when you try to publish plugins?).
Did I miss anything?
-Michal
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Michal Mocny
<mmo...@chromium.org<mailto:mmo...@chromium.org>> wrote:
> External Public link for those that just want to watch/chat:
> https://plus.google.com/events/cm4l0vifcig920qkhpn5stqiet4
>
> Hangout link to join the conversation:
> https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/hoaevent/AP36tYcNwXEyet4Xv_23HiTl4IK0jsM4NlmGy5kbLsPIW3SnOsUEIQ?authuser=0&hl=en
>
> See you in 30 minutes.
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Michal Mocny
> <mmo...@chromium.org<mailto:mmo...@chromium.org>> wrote:
>
>> +dev list again
>>
>> Not everyone could make 1pm, not everyone could make 2pm. While I don't
>> think we need a full 2 hours, I'm hoping to start late and end early --
>> proving opportunity people to pop in at either time and chime in.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Marcel Kinard
>> <cmarc...@gmail.com<mailto:cmarc...@gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Is the expected duration 1 hour or 2 hours?
>>>
>>> On Oct 8, 2014, at 10:56 AM, Michal Mocny
>>> <mmo...@chromium.org<mailto:mmo...@chromium.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > So it looks like Today 1-3 EST or Friday 1-3 EST are the best times.
>>> I'm
>>> > going to start the ball rolling to do this TODAY, but if that proves
>>> too
>>> > short notices we'll move it to Friday.
>>> >
>>> > I'll email out links to hangout at 12:30 or so, and I'm hoping Steven
>>> can
>>> > make it before 2pm since he's been most active with releases recently.
>>> >
>>> > -Michal
>>>
>>>
>>
>
