Re: Also moving to a new team

, talented, passionate, and you deliver. I can't say that I had a single bad experience here. I will definitely miss it, I hope our paths cross again. Best wishes! I may be tempted to dabble here in my off-hours. ;-) -- Marcel Kinard > On May 5, 2015, at 11:15 AM, Andrew Grieve wrote: &

Fwd: [Cordova Wiki] Update of "IssueWorkflow" by MarcelKinard

FYI, here are some changes I made today to the contributor workflow. A new person was onboarding using this document and ran into some problems around the names of the git remotes. This should correct that. > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Apache Wiki > To: Apache Wiki > Date: March 23, 2

ScientiaMobile MOVR mobile device reports

FYI, I found this. http://www.scientiamobile.com/page/movr-mobile-overview-report It's helpful in that is breaks down the numbers by continent, instead of a single global number. Also includes more details.

back button on IAB Android

Sorry to be absent for so long, product work here is eating me up. After a customer question, I noticed the behavior of the system Back button on the InAppBrowser on Android. In the scenario where the user navigates a couple of pages forward in the IAB, when they hit the system Back button the a

Re: So...can we merge 4.0.x into master yet?

I just read Adrian Ludwig's post on Plus, I now feel worse about Jelly Bean users. On one hand, we could communicate all over about loading only trusted content into the webview, but I think that will be ignored by a lot of devs. On the other hand, we could provide our own webview by default for

Re: platforms/plugins save and restore from config.xml

Thanks for creating the agenda! Could you make it writable? > On Jan 20, 2015, at 11:14 AM, Michal Mocny wrote: > > Indeed! > > Heres a gdoc for agenda: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1h4KKT0oc70BE57eJ7Bmn4c-at7dH20g0KxTKvlyvIZU/edit?usp=sharing -

Re: [VOTE] 3.7.0 Android Platform release

+1 * ran coho audit-license-headers * confirmed signature and hash with coho verify-archive * confirmed tags with coho verify-tags * installed app via createmobilespec and ran automated plugin tests with acceptable number of failures > On Jan 21, 2015, at 12:09 PM, Joe Bowser wrote: > > Please

Re: Enquiry for Barcode Scanner Plugin

Ambikesh, this mailing list is for the development of Cordova itself, not the usage of it. The Cordova web site [1] directs Cordova usage questions to StackOverflow. IBM Worklight (name recently changed to "IBM MobileFirst Foundation Platform") is a distribution of Cordova, but the process for

Re: Deprecation Wars: ICS vs Gingerbread

Another stat: Forbes estimates that the existing number of Android phones is 1.56 billion. Five percent of that is 78 million. > On Jan 13, 2015, at 1:14 AM, Ally Ogilvie wrote: > > moar stats: > https://mixpanel.com/trends/#report/android_os_adoption/from_date:-365,to_date:0

Re: Deprecation Wars: ICS vs Gingerbread

I took a quick look at why the mobile-spec plugin tests don't run on 2.3, and it appears that classList is not a defined method on Element. So the test-framework page with the "Automatic" and "Manual" buttons won't render. > On Jan 8, 2015, at 5:29 PM, Joe Bowser wrote: > > However it seems no

Re: Deprecation Wars: ICS vs Gingerbread

I forgot to mention that the non-plugin automatic tests do run on 2.3, and have exactly the same results as my Lollipop device. > On Jan 12, 2015, at 6:05 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > > I took a quick look at why the mobile-spec plugin tests don't run on 2.3, and > it appears

Re: Deprecation Wars: ICS vs Gingerbread

Er, are we looking at the same data? I see Gingerbread at 7.8% and ICS at 6.7% at that URL. "Data collected during a 7-day period ending on January 5, 2015." > On Jan 7, 2015, at 6:39 PM, Joe Bowser wrote: > > http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html#2015 > > Due to two percent

Re: Thought on improving translation and docs

I just ran genjs to generate the docs for all versions and languages, and it is roughly the same time as it took using the old Ruby system. I certainly don't want to dampen your enthusiasm, but I don't think the speed is enough of a pain to require a lot more investment of your effort. Generatin

Re: Documentation generation in pure Node.JS

Woohoo! > On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Andrey Kurdumov > wrote: > >> README.md updated and Ruby files deleted. >> Also create script which should replace Rakefile in case if somebody need >> it. - To unsubscribe, e-mail:

FYI: git client vulnerability announced

Just affects clients. Consider updating your git client. https://github.com/blog/1938-vulnerability-announced-update-your-git-clients

typo in ScrollEvent.java?

Joe, I was browsing ScrollEvent.java. Is there a typo at https://github.com/apache/cordova-android/blame/4.0.x/framework/src/org/apache/cordova/ScrollEvent.java#L48 ? I wonder if it should be "t = y" instead of "y = t".

Re: Code coverage report for Cordova-js, cordova-cli and cordova-lib

Personally, I think of test results as a tuple: success metrics, and coverage metrics. So yeah, they are useful. Even having the summary is better than nothing. Cool! On Dec 3, 2014, at 6:00 PM, Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: > Hi, > > As we are working on the various Medic/Buil

Re: Introduction

Not already covered at [1] or [2]? [1]: http://cordova.apache.org/docs/en/edge/guide_platforms_wp8_vmware.md.html [2]:http://cordova.apache.org/docs/en/edge/guide_platforms_wp8_parallels.md.html On Dec 5, 2014, at 5:02 AM, Ally Ogilvie wrote: > Chuck! Lifesaver!!! > > Had to be the only VM sof

Re: Buildbot for Cordova on Apache Infra - Update

The IBM team here would be willing to set up a slave with some of our devices. We have a collection of Android, iOS, BB10, WP8. Looking forward to instructions on slave setup ;-) On Dec 5, 2014, at 12:20 PM, Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: > It would be great if we could have othe

Re: cordova 64-bit support

On Nov 7, 2014, at 2:04 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > I suspect Vidiraj's question was driven by this: > https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=10202014a

Re: Review: Tools Release blog post

issed it, others will too, which argues that it should > be reorganized. > > I've done a PR for the other bits, but someone should consider this point. > > On 11/10/14, 11:27 AM, "Marcel Kinard" wrote: > >> Ah, missed that. >> >> On Nov 10, 2014,

Re: cordova 64-bit support

My customers still need iOS 6. Specifically the ones in the Asia-Pacific area. The feedback we are getting from there is that end users hold on the devices for longer periods than compared to North America / Europe, and they are also less likely to perform os upgrades even when available. Not a

Re: Review: Tools Release blog post

Ah, missed that. On Nov 10, 2014, at 11:20 AM, Mark Koudritsky wrote: > The two items under "Platform updates" are already links to those two posts. > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > >> You mention near the top that the iOS, Wi

Re: Review: Tools Release blog post

You mention near the top that the iOS, Windows, and WP8 platforms are updated, but there isn't mention of what that is. One could infer that this release has those updates, but I realize it's just changing the default versions of those platforms on an "add". How about linking to those posts: ht

Re: cordova 64-bit support

I suspect Vidiraj's question was driven by this: https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=10202014a

Re: [DISCUSS] Tools Release

Makes total sense. On Nov 7, 2014, at 1:34 PM, Mark Koudritsky wrote: > For the release process in general, it looks like it would be useful to > decide on the intended version names very early in the process and send out > the intended version names as part of the DISCUSS email, so that this ca

Re: [DISCUSS] Tools Release

That would be my interpretation as well, and in keeping of the spirit of semver. The versioning strategy doc doesn't specifically say what should happen to the cli version when the lib or plugman changes. I just pushed some clarifying changes into the doc: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/as

Re: [DISCUSS] Tools Release

From https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/blob/master/docs/versioning-and-release-strategy.md : "...when a new platform is released, and the platform pin in the CLI is correspondingly updated, the CLI receives a bump to its third digit, no matter the size of the version bump to those platfor

Re: Adding ability to add any platform on any OS

Exactly. On Nov 5, 2014, at 6:44 PM, Andrew Grieve wrote: > That's my understanding. Don't do check_reqs until the start of an > operation that depends on the reqs (e.g. a build) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cordo

Re: Questions re: plugin variables

If there is a reasonable question from a user, it should probably be added to the docs (assuming it's not already there). Leo, would you like to do a pull request? On Nov 5, 2014, at 8:24 PM, Mark Koudritsky wrote: > Variables should to be provided when adding the plugin > E.g: > >cordova

Re: Cordova 8th most explicitly installed npm package!

Indeed! Anyone mind if I propose this news to the Apache press folks, to see if they want to highlight it on the a.o homepage or similar? On Nov 6, 2014, at 1:56 PM, Michal Mocny wrote: > Article: http://blog.npmjs.org/post/101775448305/npm-and-front-end-packaging > > List: > https://docs.goo

Re: cordova xxx add - is there a problem?

Edna is doing some work in this area. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-7803 On Nov 3, 2014, at 4:33 PM, Treggiari, Leo wrote: >> I think you would like for each developer to be able to be able to work on >> any project regardless of locally available sdks, correct? > > Yes. Thanks.

Re: Cordova Nightly Builds

Nice! Doing an "npm info cordova" will yield a nightly-increasing number of entries in the 'version' key? These would not be artifacts that we could vote on, correct? On Oct 30, 2014, at 1:16 AM, Steven Gill wrote: > I have been doing some work on releasing nightlys recently. > > Please revi

Re: Whitelist breakout update

This sounds very interesting and relatively graceful. For a user upgrading to this new world, what would the migration steps look like? Or in other words, what would a rough sketch of the upgrade guide for this look like? The reason I ask is to see how much pain we'll ask our users to go throug

Re: [mobile-spec] consistency and reliability

I haven't seen tap/tape until Brian mentioned it here. From a quick read, it looks like a port of the tests from Jasmine to tape will be required on the runner side. Then we can use whatever reporting we want that can consume tap. So if I understand it correctly, the existing tests aren't throwa

Android L

I'm reading the Lollipop API notes and the following seem like possibilities: - Add new entries to config.xml to selectively enable setMixedContentMode() and setAcceptThirdPartyCookies() when desired for backward compatibility (off by default). http://developer.android.com/about/versions/android

Re: Adding ability to add any platform on any OS

Edna will tackle converting the iOS create script from bash to node.js. On Oct 21, 2014, at 8:55 PM, Carlos Santana wrote: > We can start by small wins by making CLI a bit smarter, if the user do > "cordova build" the cordova project might have multiple platforms and some > of them it can't comp

Re: Stale branches in cordova-js (and others)

I just added a step in the committer workflow in coho/docs. http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/cordova-coho/commit/facce79c On Oct 22, 2014, at 1:14 PM, Joe Bowser wrote: > Agreed. We should delete feature branches once they're merged in. That > said, we should have a LOT more feature bran

FYI: Android L announced

5.0 Lollipop. http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2014/10/android-be-together-not-same.html http://www.zdnet.com/google-unveils-nexus-6-phablet-nexus-9-tablet-lands-with-android-lollipop-734658/ Keep an eye out for 5.0 to appear on https://developers.google.com/android/nexus/images "in the comi

Re: Independent platform release summary

Pull request has been merged. Thanks for the feedback. On Oct 14, 2014, at 3:03 AM, Steven Gill wrote: > Lgtm! Ship! > > I'll point to it in the blog post. > > On Monday, October 13, 2014, Marcel Kinard wrote: > >> After all this discussion, it's a bit un

Re: Independent platform release summary

After all this discussion, it's a bit unclear to me where we are currently at. So I took a shot at capturing it in writing it for coho/docs/versioning-and-release-strategy.md. https://github.com/apache/cordova-coho/pull/53 I intend this to be the "Current State" of the discussion, not the "End

Re: [iOS 8] Status of WKWebView work

On Linux, it's pretty easy to listen only on localhost, I don't know how difficult it is here. I would think that even for an experimental plugin, not being accessible to peers is really important. Not being accessible to other local apps will likely become important in the future. It still sca

Re: Independent platform release summary

On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:13 PM, Michal Mocny wrote: > "Do not confuse developers" goal hopefully covers your points about > communication and information It partially covers it. To be more explicit, I'm trying to turn a negative goal into a positive goal. So instead of "how do we not mess this u

Re: Independent platform release summary

Yes, creating a doc is a great next step to solving this. Thanks for doing that. Now that there is a doc to read, I think the goals are wrong. I suggest the following: - enable releases to happen at a faster pace and lower cost - enable users to easily obtain the latest-and-greatest - clearly co

Re: Independent platform release summary

+1 On Oct 3, 2014, at 8:05 PM, Steven Gill wrote: > Looking through peoples responses on this thread and the project version > thread, many people have been pushing for a bigger jump in version number for > the CLI. > > Chatting with Shaz, he is very concerned about support issues coming in

Re: [VOTE] Tools Release

On Oct 6, 2014, at 1:07 PM, Steven Gill wrote: > I'll rip out the shrinkwrap instructions today and replace it with pining > instructions. OK. We may need to recover these instructions later after shrinkwrap matures and we decide to go back down this path. They took a lot of bruised knuckles t

Re: [VOTE] Tools Release

So my read of the shrinkwrap thread is to put it on hold until it matures more, and in the meantime do pinning. I'm looking at the 3.7.x branches and master, and I see a lack of pinning. It also looks like the tools release vote is pending a restart, so I'm thinking now would be a good time to

Re: Independent platform release summary

If a bump to major indicates an API change, how is that visible to users? Do users look at the CLI version as "the version of Cordova", or are we expecting users to look at the version of every Cordova component to understand where majors got bumped? While I agree the latter is more correct tech

Re: [VOTE] 3.6.4 Android Release

I vote +1: - Did full functional testing at tag - Confirmed sigs & hashes with `coho verify-archive` - Verified sha1s match tags with `coho verify-tags` On Oct 1, 2014, at 1:01 PM, Steven Gill wrote: > Please review and vote on this 3.6.4 Android Release. > > Release issue: https://issues.apach

Re: [DISCUSS] shrinkwrap

From my scars of the last release, what I'd suggest as closer to the ideal of "benefits of shrinkwrap with a lower cost" would be to publish to a private npm repo and use something like the --registry flag to test. Using a private registry would also give us the opportunity to wipe any published

Re: android app crashes, performing async tasks before loadUrl

the override though. > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > >> Well, that illustration had a few typos. :-/ This one should be cleaner: >> >> https://github.com/cmarcelk/cordova-android/blob/init/framework/src/org/apache/cordova/CordovaActivity.java#L201

Re: android app crashes, performing async tasks before loadUrl

Well, that illustration had a few typos. :-/ This one should be cleaner: https://github.com/cmarcelk/cordova-android/blob/init/framework/src/org/apache/cordova/CordovaActivity.java#L201 On Sep 30, 2014, at 3:20 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > If there is a real need to be able to defer

Re: android app crashes, performing async tasks before loadUrl

I can see where you are coming from for your rationale. Do you have a use case where you don't want the preferences acted upon until after onCreate()? The breakage is that our product expects the preferences to be acted upon during onCreate(), and it tries to use the result of that preference ac

Re: [Android] Unbundling okhttp

I agree it would be cleaner to not embed okhttp in Cordova. If it is removed, what do you see as the user experience? Does the CLI automatically download the okhttpd jar from square's github? Or do we expect the user to do that manually and drop it in a lib folder? Would it be possible to have

Re: android app crashes, performing async tasks before loadUrl

The reason why Martin and I are asking about this is because it is causing a breaking change to our product. Unless there is reason, we'd like to move that part from init() back to onCreate(). It looks like there is a matching change in bin/template/project/Activity.java, so this may be breaki

Re: Next Cordova Release

Thanks! Heads-up that doing the shrinkwrap made the tools release more complicated. On Sep 29, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Steven Gill wrote: > I can take it. Gives me a chance to review changes to the process when I > was away. I'll do it after I get the first vote started

Re: [DISCUSS] shrinkwrap

I didn't see a consensus on this topic yet, and a tools release is about to get rolling by Steve. My original driver for this discussion is that if we are going to do shrinkwrap, that we do it all the way instead of slapping it on at the end. Doing it does add more complexity. But it also remov

Re: Next Cordova Release

t; https://github.com/apache/cordova-lib/blob/master/cordova-lib/src/cordova/platforms.js >> >> Thx! >> Sergey >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Jesse [mailto:purplecabb...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 2:20 AM >> To: dev@c

Re: confuse about cordova-cli branches

I suggest that the way we do branches and the x.y+1.0 numbering scheme for platforms should also be the way we do it on tools and plugins. The "rb_*" branches I created for the multiple runs at the 3.6 release were a hack that shouldn't be repeated. On Sep 26, 2014, at 4:43 PM, Carlos Santana

Re: Next Cordova Release

My personal preference is to first commit to master, then cherry-pick to the desired branch. That way master is always current. On Sep 26, 2014, at 6:20 PM, Jesse wrote: > Yes, 3.6.x branch and tag it when it is ready. > then they can also be cherry-picked into master, or you could commit them

Re: Next Cordova Release

I'd suggest pushing the commits on to the end of the 3.6.x branch, and then tag it 3.6.4. On Sep 26, 2014, at 11:58 AM, Sergey Grebnov (Akvelon) wrote: > Hi, I’ve created the following repos for 3.6.4 release and going to push them > to apache. Should I use 3.6.x branch and create a new 3.6.4

Re: Next Cordova Release

There are now more than a couple npm-links which should be set up. Would it make sense to automatically do that for both the dependent and dependee in coho-repo-update or coho-repo-clone or createmobilespec.js or elsewhere? On Sep 25, 2014, at 12:34 PM, Steven Gill wrote: > Make sure you have

Re: introduction

Welcome! If you haven't already, take a look at the "Contributing" section here: http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/ On Sep 24, 2014, at 7:01 PM, Kirk Shoop (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: > Hi! > > I work for Microsoft Open Technologies. I have been watching for a while but > I am looking forward to con

out-of-the-office calendar

I like the idea. You can add me to it. On Aug 28, 2014, at 6:16 PM, Steven Gill wrote: > I have also created a calendar to keep track of Cordova Committers > Vacation. You can see it at > https://www.google.com/calendar/embed?src=MWkzbnA1ZDg2ZjlyZ29iamI2dDk1OGZhOGtAZ3JvdXAuY2FsZW5kYXIuZ29vZ2xlLm

[DISCUSS] plugins release Sept 29

e. > > @purplecabbage > risingj.com > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > >> Ping. No other votes yet. So where are we at with this? >> >> On Sep 18, 2014, at 2:53 PM, Sergey Grebnov (Akvelon) < >> v-seg...@microsoft.com> wro

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

Strange indeed. Good catch. I checked in to this, and Jekyll appears to be grabbing the date of the post from the filename, and then displaying that date. Not what I was expecting. I was able to fix this by adding a specific date field to the front matter of the blog entry and regenerating. Loo

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

t; On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > >> I've drafted a blog entry. If you have any suggestions, please either >> commit to it or submit a pull request. I'd like to post the blog entry >> tomorrow morning. >> >> https://github.

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

hed to the plugman repo, so they are live (thanks, Andrew). Thanks! On Sep 22, 2014, at 2:49 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > The vote has now closed. The results are: > > Positive Binding Votes: 3 > > - Shazron Abdullah > - Archana Naik > - Marcel Kinard > > Negative Binding

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

Sorry, forgot to include that: cmarcelk Thanks! On Sep 22, 2014, at 3:07 PM, Andrew Grieve wrote: > I can do it now, what's your npm username? > > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > >> Steve / Anis / Max / Andrew / Jesse / Ian: could one of you a

Fwd: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

Steve / Anis / Max / Andrew / Jesse / Ian: could one of you add me as an owner of the core plugins in the plugman repo so I can publish there? Thanks! Begin forwarded message: > From: Marcel Kinard > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2) > Date: September 22,

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

The vote has now closed. The results are: Positive Binding Votes: 3 - Shazron Abdullah - Archana Naik - Marcel Kinard Negative Binding Votes: 0 Other Votes: 0 The vote has passed. On Sep 17, 2014, at 11:47 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > Please review and vote on the release of this plug

Re: WKWebView for iOS8

+1. I suspect this post is of high interest since last Wednesday. On Sep 22, 2014, at 10:04 AM, Andrew Grieve wrote: > Nice post Shaz! Care to link it off of the main Cordova blog? > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:34 PM, Shazron wrote: > >> http://shazronatadobe.wordpress.com/2014/09/18/cordova-

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.13

ble in the dropdown, but not the default. > > On 9/22/14, 10:26 AM, "Marcel Kinard" wrote: > >> Michael Brooks, could you update the link from docs.cordova.io? I looked >> at [1], but the VERSION file is currently set to 3.4.0, so I'm not sure >> if this l

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.13

Thanks for catching that. Fixed. On Sep 22, 2014, at 11:33 AM, Victor Sosa wrote: > Hi Marcel. > The announcement link seems to be not working yet, although the summary is > in the News page > http://cordova.apache.org/announcements/2014/09/08/cordova-361.html > http://cordova.apache.org/#news

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.13

meone that has access to the @apachecordova account) could you tweet it? And do you also have access to the G+ account to post there also? Thanks! [1] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-labs.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/docs-cordova-io On Sep 19, 2014, at 6:05 PM, Marcel Kinard

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.13

The vote has now closed. The results are: Positive Binding Votes: 4 - Mark Koudritsky - Bryan Higgins - Sergey Grebnov - Marcel Kinard Negative Binding Votes: 0 The vote has passed. I don't think it is a good idea for a significant upgrade to go live on a Friday evening, so I will wait

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

OK, so if the consensus is that these are not blocking, then the only thing remaining for this plugins release is two more +1 votes. On Sep 19, 2014, at 3:01 PM, Jesse wrote: > These have/are being merged, but nothing should block anything. > > On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Marc

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

Err, my opinion is for a balanced approach: - Don't expect perfection because it will never happen. Thus don't wait for it. - Cook the best meal you can. If something substantial goes wrong, don't be afraid to toss it because the goal is for the customer to have a good experience, not for the coo

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

d cancelled and another one started that includes the merged pull requests listed above? On Sep 17, 2014, at 11:47 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > Please review and vote on the release of this plugins release. > > Compared to attempt #1, it includes a change to the geolocation plugin for

Re: [DISCUSS] continuous build and release process

On Sep 18, 2014, at 1:28 PM, Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: > About the release branches, is the idea that we continue to push stuff on > master and then create a new 3.7.0 branch when we would like to release 3.7.0? For plugins and tools, I suggest that we follow exactly the sam

Re: 3.6.0 docs release

I've already got the 3.6 docs built locally, but was waiting to publish them until we cleared the votes on platforms and tools for 3.6. Hopefully the vote will clear at the end of today. On Sep 19, 2014, at 1:00 PM, Sergey Grebnov (Akvelon) wrote: > When do we plan to release updated docs? -

Re: prepare logic decoupling between LIB and Platforms

I really like this metaphor / approach, and would love to see it guide future work in lib and platforms. On Sep 19, 2014, at 10:09 AM, Ian Clelland wrote: > It would seem that the separation in that case should be between "what" and > "how". -- make -lib responsible for "what" needs to be done

Re: [DISCUSS] shrinkwrap

On Sep 18, 2014, at 1:32 PM, Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: > If we do have shrinkwrap in git at all times, who would be responsible for > updating not only the versions of our dependencies, but also the dependencies > of these dependencies? One thought on this is that the rele

Re: [DISCUSS] shrinkwrap

Nope. This discussion is about tweaking our process going forward. I want to get 3.6 live as soon as the voting is complete, which is happening in the thread titled "[Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.13". Hmm, there are no other votes there yet besides mine. Folks, please review, vote, and let's ge

[Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.13

Please review and vote on this Tools Release. I believe this is the last redo of the long effort to get 3.6 out the door. Compared to the earlier vote, I cleaned up the shrinkwrap so the devDependencies don't get installed. Because I wanted to verify that it works, I published these RCs to npm

[DISCUSS] continuous build and release process

Honestly, we're not doing continuous build. Yes, there are 3 repos that build within their own scope, but we aren't building end-to-end. I think we need to be building continuously end-to-end. Here are some thoughts: - goal should be to have an automated system that generates nightly builds. T

[DISCUSS] shrinkwrap

I understand the goal of the shrinkwrap to be that all users have exactly all the same dependency versions for execution, and the developers have the same for dev/test. Today the process [1] is for the shrinkwrap to exist in git only during the release process. While this covers the users for e

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014

RC has been refreshed with this commit. New vote thread started. On Sep 17, 2014, at 6:37 PM, Archana Naik wrote: > I am done. Change is pushed to geolocation master. > > Thanks Marcel. > Archana > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > >> OK. L

[VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014 (attempt #2)

Please review and vote on the release of this plugins release. Compared to attempt #1, it includes a change to the geolocation plugin for FireOS. The tag for that repo was updated. Release issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-7571 The plugins have been published to dist/dev: https://

Re: [VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014

> On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > >> Please review and vote on the release of this plugins release. >> >> Release issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-7571 >> >> The plugins have been published to dist/dev: >> https:

[VOTE] Plugins Release Sept 17 2014

Please review and vote on the release of this plugins release. Release issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-7571 The plugins have been published to dist/dev: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cordova/CB-7571/ The packages were published from their corresponding git tags: cord

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.12

For the most part, I like this idea. It definitely is an improvement. Since there isn't significant usage of cordova-lib and cordova-plugman outside of cordova-cli, then there isn't benefit to shrinkwrapping cordova-lib and cordova-plugman themselves. The cordova-cli is what people do an "npm in

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.12

On Sep 17, 2014, at 9:54 AM, Andrew Grieve wrote: >> 2) directory install: >> npm install ../cordova-js > We've been bit before by this scenario as well. I believe the shrinkwrap > will record that cordova-js is located at "../cordova-js" instead of from > the registry in this case. Now that I

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.12

This vote is cancelled, due to a technical issue in the packaging. I will fix the issue, generate a new release candidate with a new version, and start a new vote thread. On Sep 16, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > Please review and vote on this Tools Release.

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.12

I've been doing some playing around to understand this better. Here are the 3 scenarios I tried: 1) link: cd cordova-lib rm -r node_modules rm npm-shrinkwrap.json npm link cordova-js npm install npm shrinkwrap Result is that ALL the devDependencies from cordova-js are present in the cordova-lib

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.12

nkwrap.json > npm install > npm shrinkwrap > > > that you end up with an npm-shrinkwrap.json that includes the devDependency. > > > On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > >> FYI, I am getting the following warning when I do "npm install cordova@rc

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.12

FYI, I am getting the following warning when I do "npm install cordova@rc": npm WARN engine connect@1.8.5: wanted: {"node":">= 0.4.1 < 0.7.0"} (current: {"node":"0.10.31","npm":"1.4.23"}) This is a devDependency in cordova-js, which I didn't change. If folks want this dependency changed to get

Re: [Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.12

Typo, should say: "Ran coho verify-archive over the relevant repos" On Sep 16, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > * Ran coho audit-license-headers over the relevant repos

[Vote] Tools Release 3.6.3-0.2.12

Please review and vote on this Tools Release. This tools release addresses an issue with the npm-shrinkwrap that occurred while publishing the 3.6.3 platforms. The cordova-js dependency on browserify was updated, and that was cascaded up the dependency tree through cordova-lib and cordova-cli.

Re: [Vote] 3.6.3 Cadence Release

n cordova-js clears it up. Hmm, why does cordova-lib have a dependency on cordova-js? On Sep 16, 2014, at 9:02 AM, Marcel Kinard wrote: > I'm getting the same error on esprima-fb when updating the shrinkwrap. I'll > update the browserify dependency, update the shrinkwrap, build a new tool

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >