Hi Filip,
Thanks for looking at this. I have just updated the PR(s) with corrected
config.xml ids for templates on all projects.
I am also planning to send a PR for updates to doc once these are
integrated.
--
Gorkem
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Filip Maj f...@adobe.com wrote:
Hey Gorkem,
The BlackBerry team has said on this list that they are rewriting
everything for BlackBerry 10. They haven't shared any of the code yet but
have warned that it is a complete rewrite. I am expecting it to be about
the same support (or more).
I think the issues are still valid as I can't imagine
I've started cataloguing the failing tests and missing functionality on
BB10.
There's about 50 failing tests, and many more missing features (minor and
major).
What I'm wondering is this:
1. dump all the issues in jira as I find them
or
2. report the issues as I get an opportunity to fix them
Yeah, I've heard rumours of the ull rewrite, but until they actually start
showing their code and getting involved in the list discussion, I'm
pretending like we should proceed with BB10 dev on our end as normal.
Gord, any word on a timeframe for their involvement/contribution with
Apache
Great! Thanks Lorin. I've responded to all comments in the doc. Those that
I didn't comment on, consider me a +1 :)
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Lorin Beer lorin.beer@gmail.com wrote:
Awesome! I also dropped comments and questions into the google doc
yesterday.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013
With all the use of merge and rebase here I wasn't 100% clear what we
were advising. After some discussion, I think the consensus is that:
1. Rebase your branch with master (this changes only your branch, so that
you apply work on top of most recent master commits)
1b. Rebase your branch with
I think cataloguing the test failures for BB10 in JIRA is still a useful
exercise. Like Gord mentioned, our prototype will have close to the same
level support as the existing repo, but we plan to actively work on getting
close to 100% pass rate. Once we get our code public, I'll send an overview
That's great news! Thanks for chiming in Ken and Bryan!
I won't ask for a specific date, or hold you to it, but do you have a loose
timeframe in mind? I'm wondering how much love I should be giving our
existing codebase.
If the delay from making your implementation public is engineering-related,
Really psyched about this, Andrew! It's going to be a huge improvement for
dev workflow! Are you taking all this on your own? Or are you looking for
other contributors to help out?
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:24 AM, Andrew Grieve agri...@chromium.org wrote:
Great! Thanks Lorin. I've responded to
+1
On 4/4/13 10:35 AM, Michal Mocny mmo...@chromium.org wrote:
With all the use of merge and rebase here I wasn't 100% clear what we
were advising. After some discussion, I think the consensus is that:
1. Rebase your branch with master (this changes only your branch, so that
you apply work on
Sounds good!
Ping Shaz, Andrew, Michal, Joe, Simon, and anyone else involved in Android
iOS.
On 4/4/13 5:08 AM, Gorkem Ercan gorkem.er...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Filip,
Thanks for looking at this. I have just updated the PR(s) with corrected
config.xml ids for templates on all projects.
I am also
Yes please. I want to get this pain all over with :)
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Filip Maj f...@adobe.com wrote:
Sounds good!
Ping Shaz, Andrew, Michal, Joe, Simon, and anyone else involved in Android
iOS.
On 4/4/13 5:08 AM, Gorkem Ercan gorkem.er...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Filip,
FYI - will tag soon.
Fails 2 mobile-spec tests (off 2.6.x branch), 1 is expected, the other
really should be in 2.7.0/master for this fix:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-1518
1. Compass (navigator.compass) Compass Heading model (CompassHeading)
should be able to create a new
Ally, do you want commit access to the plugin? A lot of those issues and
pull requests are outdated and just need to be closed.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Shazron shaz...@gmail.com wrote:
I would expect the PhoneGap Build guys to be more active in this, although
they have their own
Sorry, all I can say is soon. The delay is not engineering related. If it
drags on much longer, I'm sure we can arrange some sort of limited
distribution.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:49 AM, Lorin Beer lorin.beer@gmail.comwrote:
That's great news! Thanks for chiming in Ken and Bryan!
I
Some feedback:
+access origin=.*/
+access origin=http://127.0.0.1*/ !-- allow local pages --`
Why have the second line? it's made redundant by the first, and when we do
serve files locally, we do so via file: URLs.
+log level=DEBUG/
I don't see log in the widget spec. Seems like
on our morning scrum call, Jesse made the excellent suggestion of unique
test id's for each unit test in Mobile Spec. This would allow us to
reference specific test cases when filing issues, and track these tests
between issues.
Would be implemented as a script which would insert unique
Presumably these would just be helper ids so we can easily jump to a
particular test, or verify if the same test is failing on multiple devices.
As tests get added, modified, there is a possibility that a particular test
changes context/meaning, which I don't think is a big deal.
Trying not to
Ok great - in the ballpark helper ids are better than nothing, definitely
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Jesse purplecabb...@gmail.com wrote:
Presumably these would just be helper ids so we can easily jump to a
particular test, or verify if the same test is failing on multiple devices.
As
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Andrew Grieve agri...@chromium.org wrote:
Some feedback:
+access origin=.*/
+access origin=http://127.0.0.1*/ !-- allow local pages --`
Why have the second line? it's made redundant by the first, and when we do
serve files locally, we do so via file:
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Gorkem Ercan gorkem.er...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Andrew Grieve agri...@chromium.org
wrote:
Some feedback:
+access origin=.*/
+access origin=http://127.0.0.1*/ !-- allow local pages --`
Why have the second line? it's
Ok, reverted CB-1517 / CB-1518 for 2.6.x branch of mobile-spec because
those are tests for 2.7.0.
Cherry-picked some final commits from lorinbeer for iOS 2.6.x and ran
mobile-spec and Camera manual tests, everything seems ok (although DATA_URL
test does not work, I tested using example code from
Thanks Shaz!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Shazron shaz...@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, reverted CB-1517 / CB-1518 for 2.6.x branch of mobile-spec because
those are tests for 2.7.0.
Cherry-picked some final commits from lorinbeer for iOS 2.6.x and ran
mobile-spec and Camera manual tests,
23 matches
Mail list logo
