e.org
Subject: Re: API changes between 2.9.x and 3.x
http://xkcd.com/1172/
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 3:42 PM, Ken Wallis wrote:
> Ian 's point about bugs that have become "features" is also valid. Let's
> ensure we don't start breaking expected behaviour that is
y BlackBerry 10 smartphone.
> Original Message
> From: Brian LeRoux
> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 12:37 PM
> To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> Reply To: dev@cordova.apache.org
> Subject: Re: API changes between 2.9.x and 3.x
>
> ya no api upgrades for 2.9 series
>
>
16, 2013 12:37 PM
To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Reply To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Subject: Re: API changes between 2.9.x and 3.x
ya no api upgrades for 2.9 series
(but def should strive for API upgrades now that plugins are discreet)
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> +1
>
>
ya no api upgrades for 2.9 series
(but def should strive for API upgrades now that plugins are discreet)
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> +1
>
> On Oct 16, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Joe Bowser wrote:
>
> > I'm thinking that we don't want to move things
> > like API changes back
+1
On Oct 16, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Joe Bowser wrote:
> I'm thinking that we don't want to move things
> like API changes back, since this could complicate the release, which
> should just be about stability fixes.
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Joe Bowser wrote:
> Hey
>
> Other than the ResourceURI fixes, I think that we're pretty much done
> the backporting for 2.9.x on Android. That being said, I notice that
> we break apart Notification into Notification and Vibration for 3.0.x
> because of the W3C.
Hey
Other than the ResourceURI fixes, I think that we're pretty much done
the backporting for 2.9.x on Android. That being said, I notice that
we break apart Notification into Notification and Vibration for 3.0.x
because of the W3C. I'm thinking that we don't want to move things
like API changes
