Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

Hey

Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and since
those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova JS,
I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.

Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through the
bugs.

Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the egg
thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a bit.

Joe

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

I'm reverting CB-442 and re-testing. Then re-tagging to 1.6.0 - will
let the list know when I am done.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd behavior
> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test app or
> real bug.
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>> +1
>>
>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>
>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated with
>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>
>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>>
>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag 1.6.0 IMO
>>> >
>>> >On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with steps to
>>> >>take
>>> >>1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>> >>
>>> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you guys
>>> >>>know
>>> >>> soon how we're looking there.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this release?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
>>> >>>>build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that.
>>> >>>>So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>Simon Mac Donald
>>> >>>>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
>>> >>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
>>> >>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>>> >>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release
>>> >>>>>tool
>>> >>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
>>> >>>>>1.6.0rc2
>>> >>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
>>> >>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>> >>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the
>>> >>>>>file
>>> >>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>> >>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> >>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>>> >>>>>>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
>>> >>>>>>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
>>> >>>>>>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
>>> >>>>>>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>> >>>>>>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>> >>>>>><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation
>>> >>>>>>>of
>>> >>>>>>>the
>>> >>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into
>>> >>>>>>>all
>>> >>>>>>>the
>>> >>>>>>> platform

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

No .. sorry I will flog myself for this!
+1

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
<pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> None.
> Is none the new +1?
>
> Cheers,
>  Jesse
>
> Sent from my iPhone5
>
> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> None
>>
>> 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tag?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before 7.0.. So
>>>>> that
>>>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be good
>>>>> to
>>>>>> tag, ya?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test
>>>>> failed
>>>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so the
>>>>> 37
>>>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests for
>>>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a little
>>>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on
>>>>> both a
>>>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what
>>>>>>>> you're
>>>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long
>>>>>>>>> weekend.
>>>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we
>>>>> get
>>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd
>>>>> behavior
>>>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test
>>>>> app
>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>>>>> remove/retag
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion?
>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>> guys
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag
>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>>> release?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>>>>>>>>> prone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking
>>>>> out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days
>>>>> ago,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the
>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>>>>>>>>>> bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that
>>>>> we:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that
>>>>> includes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right
>>>>> order
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
>>>>> everything
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error
>>>>> prone -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>>>> takes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle
>>>>> this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>>>>>>>>>> far
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>>>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>>>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

Sorry, just had to re-tag 1.6.0

2012/4/10 Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>:
> iOS tests passing (10 failures - insignificant)
> iOS tagged 1.6.0
>
> 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
>> also a test into mobile spec) today.
>>
>> We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally had
>> more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>>
>> DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
>> should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
>> and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>> DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>>
>> Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>>
>> On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least failing
>>>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about is
>>>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>>>devices.
>>>
>>>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>>>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>>>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>>>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>>>
>>>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them, and
>>>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with tagging
>>>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>>>wondering
>>>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>>>
>>>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in the
>>>JS
>>>earlier.
>>>
>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>>>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>>>>
>>>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>>>>
>>>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>>>>
>>>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>>>>appears to
>>>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>>>>Nexus
>>>> >and see if I get the same results.
>>>> >
>>>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my
>>>> >>Galaxy
>>>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
>>>> >>>couple
>>>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that
>>>> >>>saves,
>>>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
>>>> >>>have.  I
>>>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why
>>>> >>>did it
>>>> >>> >jump up like that?
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>>>>Android.
>>>> >>>21
>>>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the
>>>> >>>same
>>>> >>> >>for
>>>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>>>>directory,
>>>> >>> then
>>>> >>> >> tag the docs.
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
>>>> >>>picking
>>>> >>> a
>>>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
>>>>working
>>>> >>> >>with
>>>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing
>>>> >>> anything
>>>> >>> >> >new.
>>>> >>> >> >
>>>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>>>> >>>cordova-js
>>>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop
>>>> >>> >>working
>>>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
>>>> >>>project.
>>>> >>> >>We
>>>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
>>>> >>>testing
>>>> >>> >>on
>>>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>>>> >>> >> >
>>>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >
>>>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>>>> >>>happens?
>>>> >>> >> >>
>>>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>
>>>> >>> >> >>> None.
>>>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>>>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>>>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>>>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> > None
>>>> >>> >> >>> >
>>>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>>>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> >>> >>wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry
>>>> >>>before
>>>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we
>>>> >>> >>should be
>>>> >>> >> >>> good
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>>>> >>>callback
>>>> >>> >>test
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
>>>>check
>>>> >>> >>out, so
>>>> >>> >> >>>the
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>>>>manual
>>>> >>> >>tests
>>>> >>> >> >>>for
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
>>>>seems
>>>> >>>to
>>>> >>> >>be a
>>>> >>> >> >>> little
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>>>>into
>>>> >>> that.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
>>>>tag. We
>>>> >>> >>pass
>>>> >>> >> >>>on
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>>>> >>>reproduce +
>>>> >>> >>fix
>>>> >>> >> >>>what
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to
>>>> >>>have a
>>>> >>> >> >>>long
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>>>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it
>>>> >>>back
>>>> >>> >>when
>>>> >>> >> >>>we
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>>>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing
>>>> >>>some
>>>> >>> >>odd
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if
>>>>it
>>>> >>>is
>>>> >>> >>my
>>>> >>> >> >>>test
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>>>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js
>>>> >>>and
>>>> >>> >> >>> integrated
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>>>>failing.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>>>>1.7.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>>>>have to
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>>>><sh...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >>wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
>>>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>>>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB
>>>> >>>code so
>>>> >>> >> >>>I'll
>>>> >>> >> >>> let
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all
>>>> >>>good
>>>> >>> to
>>>> >>> >> >>>tag
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>>>>tags. We
>>>> >>> >> >>>haven't
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>>>>shouldn't
>>>> >>>be a
>>>> >>> >> >>>problem
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj
>>>><
>>>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>>>> >>>cordova.js
>>>> >>> >> >>>file is
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>>>>process
>>>> >>>of
>>>> >>> >> >>>checking
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file
>>>> >>>over
>>>> >>> to
>>>> >>> >> >>>the
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
>>>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>>>> >>> >> >>> the
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was
>>>> >>>added
>>>> >>> >>4
>>>> >>> >> >>>days
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>>>>happened
>>>> >>> >>there.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>>>> >>>properly
>>>> >>> >>and
>>>> >>> >> >>>the
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
>>>> >>> >>release,
>>>> >>> >> >>>that
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>>>>commit
>>>> >>> >>(that
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least
>>>>in
>>>> >>>the
>>>> >>> >> >>>right
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>>>> >>> >>implementations
>>>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>>>>say we
>>>> >>> tag
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into
>>>> >>>the
>>>> >>> >> >>>various
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is
>>>> >>>also
>>>> >>> >>error
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every
>>>>time
>>>> >>> >>there
>>>> >>> >> >>>is a
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build
>>>> >>>script
>>>> >>> >> >>>handle
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing,
>>>>we
>>>> >>>are
>>>> >>> >>all
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our
>>>> >>>own
>>>> >>> >>ways.
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>>>> >>>MacDonald
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day
>>>> >>>bug in
>>>> >>> >>our
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good
>>>>to
>>>> >>>get
>>>> >>> >> >>>this
>>>> >>> >> >>> bug
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >> >
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

iOS tests passing (10 failures - insignificant)
iOS tagged 1.6.0

2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
> also a test into mobile spec) today.
>
> We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally had
> more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>
> DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
> should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
> and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
> DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>
> Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>
> On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least failing
>>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about is
>>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>>devices.
>>
>>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>>
>>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them, and
>>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with tagging
>>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>>wondering
>>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>>
>>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in the
>>JS
>>earlier.
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>>>
>>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>>>
>>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>>>appears to
>>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>>>Nexus
>>> >and see if I get the same results.
>>> >
>>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my
>>> >>Galaxy
>>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
>>> >>>couple
>>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that
>>> >>>saves,
>>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
>>> >>>have.  I
>>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why
>>> >>>did it
>>> >>> >jump up like that?
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>>>Android.
>>> >>>21
>>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the
>>> >>>same
>>> >>> >>for
>>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>>>directory,
>>> >>> then
>>> >>> >> tag the docs.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
>>> >>>picking
>>> >>> a
>>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
>>>working
>>> >>> >>with
>>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing
>>> >>> anything
>>> >>> >> >new.
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>>> >>>cordova-js
>>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop
>>> >>> >>working
>>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
>>> >>>project.
>>> >>> >>We
>>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
>>> >>>testing
>>> >>> >>on
>>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>>> >>>happens?
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>> None.
>>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> > None
>>> >>> >> >>> >
>>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry
>>> >>>before
>>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we
>>> >>> >>should be
>>> >>> >> >>> good
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>>> >>>callback
>>> >>> >>test
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
>>>check
>>> >>> >>out, so
>>> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>>>manual
>>> >>> >>tests
>>> >>> >> >>>for
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
>>>seems
>>> >>>to
>>> >>> >>be a
>>> >>> >> >>> little
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>>>into
>>> >>> that.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
>>>tag. We
>>> >>> >>pass
>>> >>> >> >>>on
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>>> >>>reproduce +
>>> >>> >>fix
>>> >>> >> >>>what
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to
>>> >>>have a
>>> >>> >> >>>long
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it
>>> >>>back
>>> >>> >>when
>>> >>> >> >>>we
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing
>>> >>>some
>>> >>> >>odd
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if
>>>it
>>> >>>is
>>> >>> >>my
>>> >>> >> >>>test
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js
>>> >>>and
>>> >>> >> >>> integrated
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>>>failing.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>>>1.7.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>>>have to
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>>><sh...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
>>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB
>>> >>>code so
>>> >>> >> >>>I'll
>>> >>> >> >>> let
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all
>>> >>>good
>>> >>> to
>>> >>> >> >>>tag
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>>>tags. We
>>> >>> >> >>>haven't
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>>>shouldn't
>>> >>>be a
>>> >>> >> >>>problem
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj
>>><
>>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>>> >>>cordova.js
>>> >>> >> >>>file is
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>>>process
>>> >>>of
>>> >>> >> >>>checking
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file
>>> >>>over
>>> >>> to
>>> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
>>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>>> >>> >> >>> the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was
>>> >>>added
>>> >>> >>4
>>> >>> >> >>>days
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>>>happened
>>> >>> >>there.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>>> >>>properly
>>> >>> >>and
>>> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
>>> >>> >>release,
>>> >>> >> >>>that
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>>>commit
>>> >>> >>(that
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least
>>>in
>>> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>>right
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>>> >>> >>implementations
>>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>>>say we
>>> >>> tag
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into
>>> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>>various
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is
>>> >>>also
>>> >>> >>error
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every
>>>time
>>> >>> >>there
>>> >>> >> >>>is a
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build
>>> >>>script
>>> >>> >> >>>handle
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing,
>>>we
>>> >>>are
>>> >>> >>all
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our
>>> >>>own
>>> >>> >>ways.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>>> >>>MacDonald
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day
>>> >>>bug in
>>> >>> >>our
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good
>>>to
>>> >>>get
>>> >>> >> >>>this
>>> >>> >> >>> bug
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>]

would it be possible to drop 1.6 *before* we slip in 'one last change'

ppl are waiting on the ios 5.1 thing bigtime


2012/4/11 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> I'm finishing up the Great Jasmine Migration today so I will make sure to
> bump up the timeout value when I drop the commits.
>
> Will test on Ipod, G-Nexus and BB 9900 before dropping commits.
>
> On 4/11/12 8:23 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I've found that I need to increase the test timeout from 2000 to 5000 or
>>even 7000 in some cases. This generally gets rid of any test timeout
>>problems and leads to more consistent results for me.
>>
>>Simon Mac Donald
>>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
>>> also a test into mobile spec) today.
>>>
>>> We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally
>>>had
>>> more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>>>
>>> DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
>>> should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
>>> and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>>> DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>>>
>>> Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
>>>failing
>>> >consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about
>>>is
>>> >the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>>> >devices.
>>> >
>>> >Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>>> >Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>>> >Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>>> >Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>>> >
>>> >All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them,
>>>and
>>> >DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
>>>tagging
>>> >this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>>> >wondering
>>> >if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>>> >
>>> >Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in
>>>the
>>> >JS
>>> >earlier.
>>> >
>>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>>> >> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>>> >>
>>> >> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>>> >>
>>> >> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>>> >>
>>> >> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>>> >>appears to
>>> >> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>>> >>Nexus
>>> >> >and see if I get the same results.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on
>>>my
>>> >> >>Galaxy
>>> >> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
>>> >> >>>couple
>>> >> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test
>>>that
>>> >> >>>saves,
>>> >> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
>>> >> >>>have.  I
>>> >> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.
>>>Why
>>> >> >>>did it
>>> >> >>> >jump up like that?
>>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>>> >>Android.
>>> >> >>>21
>>> >> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says
>>>the
>>> >> >>>same
>>> >> >>> >>for
>>> >> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>>> >>directory,
>>> >> >>> then
>>> >> >>> >> tag the docs.
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
>>> >> >>>picking
>>> >> >>> a
>>> >> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
>>> >>working
>>> >> >>> >>with
>>> >> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
>>>introducing
>>> >> >>> anything
>>> >> >>> >> >new.
>>> >> >>> >> >
>>> >> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>>> >> >>>cordova-js
>>> >> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to
>>>stop
>>> >> >>> >>working
>>> >> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
>>> >> >>>project.
>>> >> >>> >>We
>>> >> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
>>> >> >>>testing
>>> >> >>> >>on
>>> >> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>>> >> >>> >> >
>>> >> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >
>>> >> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>>> >> >>>happens?
>>> >> >>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>> >> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> None.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>>> >> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> > None
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>>> >><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
>>>BlackBerry
>>> >> >>>before
>>> >> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and
>>>then, we
>>> >> >>> >>should be
>>> >> >>> >> >>> good
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>>> >> >>>callback
>>> >> >>> >>test
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
>>> >>check
>>> >> >>> >>out, so
>>> >> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>>> >>manual
>>> >> >>> >>tests
>>> >> >>> >> >>>for
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
>>> >>seems
>>> >> >>>to
>>> >> >>> >>be a
>>> >> >>> >> >>> little
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>>> >>into
>>> >> >>> that.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
>>> >>tag. We
>>> >> >>> >>pass
>>> >> >>> >> >>>on
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>>> >> >>>reproduce +
>>> >> >>> >>fix
>>> >> >>> >> >>>what
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>> >> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush
>>>to
>>> >> >>>have a
>>> >> >>> >> >>>long
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>>> >> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put
>>>it
>>> >> >>>back
>>> >> >>> >>when
>>> >> >>> >> >>>we
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>>> >> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
>>>Seeing
>>> >> >>>some
>>> >> >>> >>odd
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure
>>>if
>>> >>it
>>> >> >>>is
>>> >> >>> >>my
>>> >> >>> >> >>>test
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>>> >> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
>>>cordova-js
>>> >> >>>and
>>> >> >>> >> >>> integrated
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>>> >>failing.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>>> >>1.7.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj"
>>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>>> >>have to
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>>> >><sh...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
>>>reset
>>> >> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
>>>think
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>>> >> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest
>>>BB
>>> >> >>>code so
>>> >> >>> >> >>>I'll
>>> >> >>> >> >>> let
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're
>>>all
>>> >> >>>good
>>> >> >>> to
>>> >> >>> >> >>>tag
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>>> >>tags. We
>>> >> >>> >> >>>haven't
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>>> >>shouldn't
>>> >> >>>be a
>>> >> >>> >> >>>problem
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip
>>>Maj
>>> >><
>>> >> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>>> >> >>>cordova.js
>>> >> >>> >> >>>file is
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>>> >>process
>>> >> >>>of
>>> >> >>> >> >>>checking
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the
>>>file
>>> >> >>>over
>>> >> >>> to
>>> >> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern
>>>then
>>> >> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>>> >> >>> >> >>> the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
>>>automatically.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js
>>>was
>>> >> >>>added
>>> >> >>> >>4
>>> >> >>> >> >>>days
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>>> >>happened
>>> >> >>> >>there.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>>> >> >>>properly
>>> >> >>> >>and
>>> >> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the
>>>1.6.0
>>> >> >>> >>release,
>>> >> >>> >> >>>that
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
>>>cordova-js.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>>> >>commit
>>> >> >>> >>(that
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
>>>least
>>> >>in
>>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>>right
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>>> >> >>> >>implementations
>>> >> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>>> >>say we
>>> >> >>> tag
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
>>>into
>>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >> >>>various
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It
>>>is
>>> >> >>>also
>>> >> >>> >>error
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
>>>every
>>> >>time
>>> >> >>> >>there
>>> >> >>> >> >>>is a
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
>>>build
>>> >> >>>script
>>> >> >>> >> >>>handle
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
>>>testing,
>>> >>we
>>> >> >>>are
>>> >> >>> >>all
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in
>>>our
>>> >> >>>own
>>> >> >>> >>ways.
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>>> >> >>>MacDonald
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero
>>>day
>>> >> >>>bug in
>>> >> >>> >>our
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be
>>>good
>>> >>to
>>> >> >>>get
>>> >> >>> >> >>>this
>>> >> >>> >> >>> bug
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> >> >
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

I'm finishing up the Great Jasmine Migration today so I will make sure to
bump up the timeout value when I drop the commits.

Will test on Ipod, G-Nexus and BB 9900 before dropping commits.

On 4/11/12 8:23 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I've found that I need to increase the test timeout from 2000 to 5000 or
>even 7000 in some cases. This generally gets rid of any test timeout
>problems and leads to more consistent results for me.
>
>Simon Mac Donald
>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
>> also a test into mobile spec) today.
>>
>> We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally
>>had
>> more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>>
>> DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
>> should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
>> and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>> DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>>
>> Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>>
>> On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
>>failing
>> >consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about
>>is
>> >the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>> >devices.
>> >
>> >Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>> >Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>> >Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>> >Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>> >
>> >All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them,
>>and
>> >DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
>>tagging
>> >this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>> >wondering
>> >if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>> >
>> >Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in
>>the
>> >JS
>> >earlier.
>> >
>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>> >> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>> >>
>> >> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>> >>
>> >> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>> >>
>> >> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>> >>appears to
>> >> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>> >>Nexus
>> >> >and see if I get the same results.
>> >> >
>> >> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on
>>my
>> >> >>Galaxy
>> >> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
>> >> >>>couple
>> >> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test
>>that
>> >> >>>saves,
>> >> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
>> >> >>>have.  I
>> >> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.
>>Why
>> >> >>>did it
>> >> >>> >jump up like that?
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>wrote:
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>> >>Android.
>> >> >>>21
>> >> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says
>>the
>> >> >>>same
>> >> >>> >>for
>> >> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>> >>directory,
>> >> >>> then
>> >> >>> >> tag the docs.
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
>> >> >>>picking
>> >> >>> a
>> >> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
>> >>working
>> >> >>> >>with
>> >> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
>>introducing
>> >> >>> anything
>> >> >>> >> >new.
>> >> >>> >> >
>> >> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>> >> >>>cordova-js
>> >> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to
>>stop
>> >> >>> >>working
>> >> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
>> >> >>>project.
>> >> >>> >>We
>> >> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
>> >> >>>testing
>> >> >>> >>on
>> >> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>> >> >>> >> >
>> >> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >
>> >> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>> >> >>>happens?
>> >> >>> >> >>
>> >> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>> >> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>
>> >> >>> >> >>> None.
>> >> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>> >> >>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>> >> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>> >> >>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >> >>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>> >>wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> > None
>> >> >>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>> >>wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>> >><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >> >>> >>wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
>>BlackBerry
>> >> >>>before
>> >> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and
>>then, we
>> >> >>> >>should be
>> >> >>> >> >>> good
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>> >> >>>callback
>> >> >>> >>test
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
>> >>check
>> >> >>> >>out, so
>> >> >>> >> >>>the
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>> >>manual
>> >> >>> >>tests
>> >> >>> >> >>>for
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
>> >>seems
>> >> >>>to
>> >> >>> >>be a
>> >> >>> >> >>> little
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>> >>into
>> >> >>> that.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
>> >>tag. We
>> >> >>> >>pass
>> >> >>> >> >>>on
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>> >> >>>reproduce +
>> >> >>> >>fix
>> >> >>> >> >>>what
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>> >> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush
>>to
>> >> >>>have a
>> >> >>> >> >>>long
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>> >> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put
>>it
>> >> >>>back
>> >> >>> >>when
>> >> >>> >> >>>we
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>> >> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
>>Seeing
>> >> >>>some
>> >> >>> >>odd
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure
>>if
>> >>it
>> >> >>>is
>> >> >>> >>my
>> >> >>> >> >>>test
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>> >> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
>>cordova-js
>> >> >>>and
>> >> >>> >> >>> integrated
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>> >>failing.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>> >>1.7.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj"
>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >> >>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>> >>have to
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>> >><sh...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >>wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
>>reset
>> >> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
>>think
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>> >> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest
>>BB
>> >> >>>code so
>> >> >>> >> >>>I'll
>> >> >>> >> >>> let
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're
>>all
>> >> >>>good
>> >> >>> to
>> >> >>> >> >>>tag
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>> >>tags. We
>> >> >>> >> >>>haven't
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>> >>shouldn't
>> >> >>>be a
>> >> >>> >> >>>problem
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip
>>Maj
>> >><
>> >> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>> >> >>>cordova.js
>> >> >>> >> >>>file is
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>> >>process
>> >> >>>of
>> >> >>> >> >>>checking
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the
>>file
>> >> >>>over
>> >> >>> to
>> >> >>> >> >>>the
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern
>>then
>> >> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>> >> >>> >> >>> the
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
>>automatically.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js
>>was
>> >> >>>added
>> >> >>> >>4
>> >> >>> >> >>>days
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>> >>happened
>> >> >>> >>there.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>> >> >>>properly
>> >> >>> >>and
>> >> >>> >> >>>the
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the
>>1.6.0
>> >> >>> >>release,
>> >> >>> >> >>>that
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
>>cordova-js.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>> >>commit
>> >> >>> >>(that
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
>>least
>> >>in
>> >> >>>the
>> >> >>> >> >>>right
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>> >> >>> >>implementations
>> >> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>> >>say we
>> >> >>> tag
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
>>into
>> >> >>>the
>> >> >>> >> >>>various
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It
>>is
>> >> >>>also
>> >> >>> >>error
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
>>every
>> >>time
>> >> >>> >>there
>> >> >>> >> >>>is a
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
>>build
>> >> >>>script
>> >> >>> >> >>>handle
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
>>testing,
>> >>we
>> >> >>>are
>> >> >>> >>all
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in
>>our
>> >> >>>own
>> >> >>> >>ways.
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>> >> >>>MacDonald
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero
>>day
>> >> >>>bug in
>> >> >>> >>our
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be
>>good
>> >>to
>> >> >>>get
>> >> >>> >> >>>this
>> >> >>> >> >>> bug
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >> >
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>]

I've found that I need to increase the test timeout from 2000 to 5000 or
even 7000 in some cases. This generally gets rid of any test timeout
problems and leads to more consistent results for me.

Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald


On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

> Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
> also a test into mobile spec) today.
>
> We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally had
> more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>
> DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
> should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
> and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
> DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>
> Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>
> On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least failing
> >consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about is
> >the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
> >devices.
> >
> >Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
> >Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
> >Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
> >Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
> >
> >All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them, and
> >DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with tagging
> >this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
> >wondering
> >if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
> >
> >Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in the
> >JS
> >earlier.
> >
> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> >> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
> >> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
> >>
> >> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
> >>
> >> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
> >>
> >> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
> >>appears to
> >> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
> >>Nexus
> >> >and see if I get the same results.
> >> >
> >> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my
> >> >>Galaxy
> >> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
> >> >>>couple
> >> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that
> >> >>>saves,
> >> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
> >> >>>have.  I
> >> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why
> >> >>>did it
> >> >>> >jump up like that?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
> >>Android.
> >> >>>21
> >> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the
> >> >>>same
> >> >>> >>for
> >> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
> >>directory,
> >> >>> then
> >> >>> >> tag the docs.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
> >> >>>picking
> >> >>> a
> >> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
> >>working
> >> >>> >>with
> >> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing
> >> >>> anything
> >> >>> >> >new.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
> >> >>>cordova-js
> >> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop
> >> >>> >>working
> >> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
> >> >>>project.
> >> >>> >>We
> >> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
> >> >>>testing
> >> >>> >>on
> >> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
> >> >>>happens?
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
> >> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> None.
> >> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
> >> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >>> > None
> >> >>> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> >> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
> >><fi...@adobe.com>
> >> >>> >>wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry
> >> >>>before
> >> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we
> >> >>> >>should be
> >> >>> >> >>> good
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
> >> >>>callback
> >> >>> >>test
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
> >>check
> >> >>> >>out, so
> >> >>> >> >>>the
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
> >>manual
> >> >>> >>tests
> >> >>> >> >>>for
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
> >>seems
> >> >>>to
> >> >>> >>be a
> >> >>> >> >>> little
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
> >>into
> >> >>> that.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
> >>tag. We
> >> >>> >>pass
> >> >>> >> >>>on
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
> >> >>>reproduce +
> >> >>> >>fix
> >> >>> >> >>>what
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
> >> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to
> >> >>>have a
> >> >>> >> >>>long
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
> >> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >>>wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it
> >> >>>back
> >> >>> >>when
> >> >>> >> >>>we
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
> >> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing
> >> >>>some
> >> >>> >>odd
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if
> >>it
> >> >>>is
> >> >>> >>my
> >> >>> >> >>>test
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
> >> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js
> >> >>>and
> >> >>> >> >>> integrated
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
> >>failing.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
> >>1.7.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
> >>have to
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
> >><sh...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >>wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
> >> >>> >> >>>discussion?
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
> >> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB
> >> >>>code so
> >> >>> >> >>>I'll
> >> >>> >> >>> let
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all
> >> >>>good
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> >> >>>tag
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
> >>tags. We
> >> >>> >> >>>haven't
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
> >>shouldn't
> >> >>>be a
> >> >>> >> >>>problem
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj
> >><
> >> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
> >> >>>cordova.js
> >> >>> >> >>>file is
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
> >>process
> >> >>>of
> >> >>> >> >>>checking
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file
> >> >>>over
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> >> >>>the
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
> >> >>> >> >>>certainly,
> >> >>> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was
> >> >>>added
> >> >>> >>4
> >> >>> >> >>>days
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
> >>happened
> >> >>> >>there.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
> >> >>>properly
> >> >>> >>and
> >> >>> >> >>>the
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
> >> >>> >>release,
> >> >>> >> >>>that
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
> >>commit
> >> >>> >>(that
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least
> >>in
> >> >>>the
> >> >>> >> >>>right
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
> >> >>> >>implementations
> >> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
> >>say we
> >> >>> tag
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into
> >> >>>the
> >> >>> >> >>>various
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is
> >> >>>also
> >> >>> >>error
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every
> >>time
> >> >>> >>there
> >> >>> >> >>>is a
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build
> >> >>>script
> >> >>> >> >>>handle
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing,
> >>we
> >> >>>are
> >> >>> >>all
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our
> >> >>>own
> >> >>> >>ways.
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
> >> >>>MacDonald
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day
> >> >>>bug in
> >> >>> >>our
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good
> >>to
> >> >>>get
> >> >>> >> >>>this
> >> >>> >> >>> bug
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

Let's modify it inside the webworks repo for now, and create a release
checklist for webworks + note that in the release process wiki article [1]
(bottom of page).

[1] http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CuttingReleases


On 4/10/12 1:40 PM, "Drew Walters" <de...@gmail.com> wrote:

>One thing I just remembered which is a gotcha with cordova-js.  The
>version for Playbook comes from the cordova-js
>lib/playbook/plugin/playbook/manager.js file.  So in order to update
>Playbook version to 1.6.0 (its currently 1.6.0rc2) then cordova-js
>would need updated.
>
>Alternatively, I can just modify the file in the blackberry repo which
>was copied from cordova-js.
>
>Thoughts?
>
>2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> Should I tag blackberry or Drew, you got that?
>>
>> On 4/10/12 1:27 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Retagged Android 1.6.0
>>>
>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
>>>>
>>>> On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js
>>>>(and
>>>> >also a test into mobile spec) today.
>>>> >
>>>> >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we
>>>>generally
>>>>had
>>>> >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of
>>>>line.
>>>> >
>>>> >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That
>>>>certainly
>>>> >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in.
>>>>Gord
>>>> >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>>>> >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>>>> >
>>>> >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>>>> >
>>>> >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
>>>>failing
>>>> >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care
>>>>about is
>>>> >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple
>>>>Android
>>>> >>devices.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>>>> >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>>>> >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>>>> >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>>>> >>
>>>> >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them,
>>>>and
>>>> >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
>>>>tagging
>>>> >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>>>> >>wondering
>>>> >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in
>>>>the
>>>> >>JS
>>>> >>earlier.
>>>> >>
>>>> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the
>>>>contact
>>>> >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>>>> >>>appears to
>>>> >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the
>>>>Galaxy
>>>> >>>Nexus
>>>> >>> >and see if I get the same results.
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that
>>>>on
>>>>my
>>>> >>> >>Galaxy
>>>> >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but
>>>>only
>>>>a
>>>> >>> >>>couple
>>>> >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test
>>>>that
>>>> >>> >>>saves,
>>>> >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most
>>>>people
>>>> >>> >>>have.  I
>>>> >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.
>>>>Why
>>>> >>> >>>did it
>>>> >>> >>> >jump up like that?
>>>> >>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >
>>>> >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>>>> >>>Android.
>>>> >>> >>>21
>>>> >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>>>> >>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse
>>>>says
>>>>the
>>>> >>> >>>same
>>>> >>> >>> >>for
>>>> >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>>>> >>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>>>> >>>directory,
>>>> >>> >>> then
>>>> >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
>>>> >>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are
>>>>just
>>>> >>> >>>picking
>>>> >>> >>> a
>>>> >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have
>>>>been
>>>> >>>working
>>>> >>> >>> >>with
>>>> >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
>>>>introducing
>>>> >>> >>> anything
>>>> >>> >>> >> >new.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >
>>>> >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code
>>>>in
>>>> >>> >>>cordova-js
>>>> >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have
>>>>to
>>>> >>>stop
>>>> >>> >>> >>working
>>>> >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of
>>>>this
>>>> >>> >>>project.
>>>> >>> >>> >>We
>>>> >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be
>>>>comfortable
>>>> >>> >>>testing
>>>> >>> >>> >>on
>>>> >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >
>>>> >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android,
>>>>what
>>>> >>> >>>happens?
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>>> >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> None.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> > None
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser"
>>>><bo...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>>>> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> >>> >>> >>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
>>>>BlackBerry
>>>> >>> >>>before
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and
>>>>then,
>>>> >>>we
>>>> >>> >>> >>should be
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> good
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> >>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The
>>>>accel
>>>> >>> >>>callback
>>>> >>> >>> >>test
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they
>>>>all
>>>> >>>check
>>>> >>> >>> >>out, so
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>the
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed.
>>>>The
>>>> >>>manual
>>>> >>> >>> >>tests
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>for
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so
>>>>there
>>>> >>>seems
>>>> >>> >>>to
>>>> >>> >>> >>be a
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> little
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are
>>>>looking
>>>> >>>into
>>>> >>> >>> that.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good
>>>>to
>>>> >>>tag. We
>>>> >>> >>> >>pass
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>on
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> >>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>>>> >>> >>>reproduce +
>>>> >>> >>> >>fix
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>what
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my
>>>>rush to
>>>> >>> >>>have a
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>long
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>>>> >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll
>>>>put it
>>>> >>> >>>back
>>>> >>> >>> >>when
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>we
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew
>>>>Walters <
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
>>>> >>>Seeing
>>>> >>> >>>some
>>>> >>> >>> >>odd
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not
>>>>sure if
>>>> >>>it
>>>> >>> >>>is
>>>> >>> >>> >>my
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>test
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian
>>>>LeRoux
>>>> >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj
>>>>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
>>>> >>>cordova-js
>>>> >>> >>>and
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>>>> >>>failing.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest
>>>>in
>>>> >>>1.7.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj"
>>>><fil@adobe.com
>>>> >
>>>> >>> >>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone.
>>>>Just
>>>> >>>have to
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>>>> >>><sh...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >>> >>wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
>>>> >>>reset
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
>>>>think
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip
>>>>Maj
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the
>>>>latest
>>>>BB
>>>> >>> >>>code so
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> let
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before
>>>>we're
>>>>all
>>>> >>> >>>good
>>>> >>> >>> to
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>tag
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>>>> >>>tags. We
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>>>> >>>shouldn't
>>>> >>> >>>be a
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>problem
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM,
>>>>Filip
>>>>Maj
>>>> >>><
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays
>>>>out.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a
>>>>tagged
>>>> >>> >>>cordova.js
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>file is
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>>>> >>>process
>>>> >>> >>>of
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>checking
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the
>>>>file
>>>> >>> >>>over
>>>> >>> >>> to
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>the
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the
>>>>concern
>>>> >>>then
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> the
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
>>>>automatically.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in
>>>>cordova-js
>>>> >>>was
>>>> >>> >>>added
>>>> >>> >>> >>4
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>days
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>>>> >>>happened
>>>> >>> >>> >>there.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being
>>>>ordered
>>>> >>> >>>properly
>>>> >>> >>> >>and
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>the
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the
>>>>1.6.0
>>>> >>> >>> >>release,
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>that
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
>>>>cordova-js.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the
>>>>latest
>>>> >>>commit
>>>> >>> >>> >>(that
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
>>>>least
>>>> >>>in
>>>> >>> >>>the
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>right
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into
>>>>platforms
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>>>> >>> >>> >>implementations
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f
>>>>it, I
>>>> >>>say we
>>>> >>> >>> tag
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking
>>>>cordova-js
>>>> >>>into
>>>> >>> >>>the
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>various
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.
>>>>It is
>>>> >>> >>>also
>>>> >>> >>> >>error
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
>>>>every
>>>> >>>time
>>>> >>> >>> >>there
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>is a
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of
>>>>sync.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
>>>>build
>>>> >>> >>>script
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>handle
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
>>>>testing,
>>>> >>>we
>>>> >>> >>>are
>>>> >>> >>> >>all
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current
>>>>in
>>>> >>>our
>>>> >>> >>>own
>>>> >>> >>> >>ways.
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM,
>>>>Simon
>>>> >>> >>>MacDonald
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a
>>>>zero
>>>>day
>>>> >>> >>>bug in
>>>> >>> >>> >>our
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be
>>>>good
>>>> >>>to
>>>> >>> >>>get
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>this
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> bug
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>>> >>> >>> >> >
>>>> >>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>> >>
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>>
>>>> >>> >>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>]

One thing I just remembered which is a gotcha with cordova-js.  The
version for Playbook comes from the cordova-js
lib/playbook/plugin/playbook/manager.js file.  So in order to update
Playbook version to 1.6.0 (its currently 1.6.0rc2) then cordova-js
would need updated.

Alternatively, I can just modify the file in the blackberry repo which
was copied from cordova-js.

Thoughts?

2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> Should I tag blackberry or Drew, you got that?
>
> On 4/10/12 1:27 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Retagged Android 1.6.0
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
>>> >also a test into mobile spec) today.
>>> >
>>> >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally
>>>had
>>> >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>>> >
>>> >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That
>>>certainly
>>> >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
>>> >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>>> >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>>> >
>>> >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>>> >
>>> >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
>>>failing
>>> >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care
>>>about is
>>> >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>>> >>devices.
>>> >>
>>> >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>>> >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>>> >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>>> >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>>> >>
>>> >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them,
>>>and
>>> >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
>>>tagging
>>> >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>>> >>wondering
>>> >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>>> >>
>>> >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in
>>>the
>>> >>JS
>>> >>earlier.
>>> >>
>>> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>>> >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>>> >>>appears to
>>> >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>>> >>>Nexus
>>> >>> >and see if I get the same results.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>wrote:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on
>>>my
>>> >>> >>Galaxy
>>> >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only
>>>a
>>> >>> >>>couple
>>> >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test
>>>that
>>> >>> >>>saves,
>>> >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most
>>>people
>>> >>> >>>have.  I
>>> >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.
>>>Why
>>> >>> >>>did it
>>> >>> >>> >jump up like that?
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>>> >>>Android.
>>> >>> >>>21
>>> >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>>> >>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says
>>>the
>>> >>> >>>same
>>> >>> >>> >>for
>>> >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>>> >>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>>> >>>directory,
>>> >>> >>> then
>>> >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
>>> >>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are
>>>just
>>> >>> >>>picking
>>> >>> >>> a
>>> >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
>>> >>>working
>>> >>> >>> >>with
>>> >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
>>>introducing
>>> >>> >>> anything
>>> >>> >>> >> >new.
>>> >>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>>> >>> >>>cordova-js
>>> >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to
>>> >>>stop
>>> >>> >>> >>working
>>> >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of
>>>this
>>> >>> >>>project.
>>> >>> >>> >>We
>>> >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be
>>>comfortable
>>> >>> >>>testing
>>> >>> >>> >>on
>>> >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>>> >>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>>> >>> >>>happens?
>>> >>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>> >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> None.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> > None
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>>> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
>>>BlackBerry
>>> >>> >>>before
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and
>>>then,
>>> >>>we
>>> >>> >>> >>should be
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> good
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>>wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>>> >>> >>>callback
>>> >>> >>> >>test
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
>>> >>>check
>>> >>> >>> >>out, so
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>>> >>>manual
>>> >>> >>> >>tests
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>for
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
>>> >>>seems
>>> >>> >>>to
>>> >>> >>> >>be a
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> little
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>>> >>>into
>>> >>> >>> that.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
>>> >>>tag. We
>>> >>> >>> >>pass
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>on
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>>wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>>> >>> >>>reproduce +
>>> >>> >>> >>fix
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>what
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>> >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my
>>>rush to
>>> >>> >>>have a
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>long
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>>> >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll
>>>put it
>>> >>> >>>back
>>> >>> >>> >>when
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>we
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
>>> >>>Seeing
>>> >>> >>>some
>>> >>> >>> >>odd
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not
>>>sure if
>>> >>>it
>>> >>> >>>is
>>> >>> >>> >>my
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>test
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>>> >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
>>> >>>cordova-js
>>> >>> >>>and
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>>> >>>failing.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>>> >>>1.7.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj"
>>><fil@adobe.com
>>> >
>>> >>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>>> >>>have to
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>>> >>><sh...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
>>> >>>reset
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
>>>think
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>>> >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest
>>>BB
>>> >>> >>>code so
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> let
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're
>>>all
>>> >>> >>>good
>>> >>> >>> to
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>tag
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>>> >>>tags. We
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>>> >>>shouldn't
>>> >>> >>>be a
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>problem
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip
>>>Maj
>>> >>><
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays
>>>out.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>>> >>> >>>cordova.js
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>file is
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>>> >>>process
>>> >>> >>>of
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>checking
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the
>>>file
>>> >>> >>>over
>>> >>> >>> to
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern
>>> >>>then
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> the
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
>>>automatically.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js
>>> >>>was
>>> >>> >>>added
>>> >>> >>> >>4
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>days
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>>> >>>happened
>>> >>> >>> >>there.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>>> >>> >>>properly
>>> >>> >>> >>and
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the
>>>1.6.0
>>> >>> >>> >>release,
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>that
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
>>>cordova-js.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>>> >>>commit
>>> >>> >>> >>(that
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
>>>least
>>> >>>in
>>> >>> >>>the
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>right
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>>> >>> >>> >>implementations
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>>> >>>say we
>>> >>> >>> tag
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
>>> >>>into
>>> >>> >>>the
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>various
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.
>>>It is
>>> >>> >>>also
>>> >>> >>> >>error
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
>>>every
>>> >>>time
>>> >>> >>> >>there
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>is a
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of
>>>sync.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
>>>build
>>> >>> >>>script
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>handle
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
>>>testing,
>>> >>>we
>>> >>> >>>are
>>> >>> >>> >>all
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in
>>> >>>our
>>> >>> >>>own
>>> >>> >>> >>ways.
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>>> >>> >>>MacDonald
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero
>>>day
>>> >>> >>>bug in
>>> >>> >>> >>our
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be
>>>good
>>> >>>to
>>> >>> >>>get
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>this
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> bug
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>]

+1 ---will add an issue to the tracker to automate this part

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Simon MacDonald
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I had to retag Android to 1.6.0. The .js file that Joe added into repo did
> not have the fix for FileWriter.seek().
>
> We really need to make this step part of the packaging of the release. If
> we had a script that builds all the deliverables and then we go off and
> test them would be better than all of us doing our ad hoc builds.
>
> Simon Mac Donald
> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Retagged Android 1.6.0
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
>> >
>> > On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
>> > >also a test into mobile spec) today.
>> > >
>> > >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally
>> had
>> > >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>> > >
>> > >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
>> > >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
>> > >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>> > >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>> > >
>> > >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>> > >
>> > >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
>> failing
>> > >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about
>> is
>> > >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>> > >>devices.
>> > >>
>> > >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>> > >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>> > >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>> > >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>> > >>
>> > >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them,
>> and
>> > >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
>> tagging
>> > >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>> > >>wondering
>> > >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>> > >>
>> > >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in
>> the
>> > >>JS
>> > >>earlier.
>> > >>
>> > >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>> > >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>> > >>>appears to
>> > >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>> > >>>Nexus
>> > >>> >and see if I get the same results.
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>> > >>>wrote:
>> > >>> >
>> > >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on
>> my
>> > >>> >>Galaxy
>> > >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
>> > >>> >>>couple
>> > >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test
>> that
>> > >>> >>>saves,
>> > >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
>> > >>> >>>have.  I
>> > >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.
>>  Why
>> > >>> >>>did it
>> > >>> >>> >jump up like that?
>> > >>> >>> >
>> > >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >
>> > >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>> > >>>Android.
>> > >>> >>>21
>> > >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>> > >>> >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says
>> the
>> > >>> >>>same
>> > >>> >>> >>for
>> > >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>> > >>> >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>> > >>>directory,
>> > >>> >>> then
>> > >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
>> > >>> >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
>> > >>> >>>picking
>> > >>> >>> a
>> > >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
>> > >>>working
>> > >>> >>> >>with
>> > >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
>> introducing
>> > >>> >>> anything
>> > >>> >>> >> >new.
>> > >>> >>> >> >
>> > >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>> > >>> >>>cordova-js
>> > >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to
>> > >>>stop
>> > >>> >>> >>working
>> > >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
>> > >>> >>>project.
>> > >>> >>> >>We
>> > >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
>> > >>> >>>testing
>> > >>> >>> >>on
>> > >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>> > >>> >>> >> >
>> > >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >
>> > >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>> > >>> >>>happens?
>> > >>> >>> >> >>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>> > >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> None.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>> > >>>wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> > None
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>> > >>>wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>> > >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> > >>> >>> >>wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
>> BlackBerry
>> > >>> >>>before
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then,
>> > >>>we
>> > >>> >>> >>should be
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> good
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> > >>>wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>> > >>> >>>callback
>> > >>> >>> >>test
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
>> > >>>check
>> > >>> >>> >>out, so
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>the
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>> > >>>manual
>> > >>> >>> >>tests
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>for
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
>> > >>>seems
>> > >>> >>>to
>> > >>> >>> >>be a
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> little
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>> > >>>into
>> > >>> >>> that.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
>> > >>>tag. We
>> > >>> >>> >>pass
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>on
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> > >>>wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>> > >>> >>>reproduce +
>> > >>> >>> >>fix
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>what
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>> > >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush
>> to
>> > >>> >>>have a
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>long
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>> > >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put
>> it
>> > >>> >>>back
>> > >>> >>> >>when
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>we
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
>> > >>>Seeing
>> > >>> >>>some
>> > >>> >>> >>odd
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure
>> if
>> > >>>it
>> > >>> >>>is
>> > >>> >>> >>my
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>test
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>> > >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
>> > >>>cordova-js
>> > >>> >>>and
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>> > >>>failing.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>> > >>>1.7.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <
>> fil@adobe.com
>> > >
>> > >>> >>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>> > >>>have to
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>> > >>><sh...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >>> >>wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
>> > >>>reset
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
>> think
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>> > >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest
>> BB
>> > >>> >>>code so
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> let
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're
>> all
>> > >>> >>>good
>> > >>> >>> to
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>tag
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>> > >>>tags. We
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>> > >>>shouldn't
>> > >>> >>>be a
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>problem
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip
>> Maj
>> > >>><
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>> > >>> >>>cordova.js
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>file is
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>> > >>>process
>> > >>> >>>of
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>checking
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the
>> file
>> > >>> >>>over
>> > >>> >>> to
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>the
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern
>> > >>>then
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> the
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
>> automatically.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js
>> > >>>was
>> > >>> >>>added
>> > >>> >>> >>4
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>days
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>> > >>>happened
>> > >>> >>> >>there.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>> > >>> >>>properly
>> > >>> >>> >>and
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>the
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the
>> 1.6.0
>> > >>> >>> >>release,
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>that
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
>> cordova-js.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>> > >>>commit
>> > >>> >>> >>(that
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
>> least
>> > >>>in
>> > >>> >>>the
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>right
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>> > >>> >>> >>implementations
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>> > >>>say we
>> > >>> >>> tag
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
>> > >>>into
>> > >>> >>>the
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>various
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It
>> is
>> > >>> >>>also
>> > >>> >>> >>error
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
>> every
>> > >>>time
>> > >>> >>> >>there
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>is a
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
>> build
>> > >>> >>>script
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>handle
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
>> testing,
>> > >>>we
>> > >>> >>>are
>> > >>> >>> >>all
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in
>> > >>>our
>> > >>> >>>own
>> > >>> >>> >>ways.
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>> > >>> >>>MacDonald
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero
>> day
>> > >>> >>>bug in
>> > >>> >>> >>our
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be
>> good
>> > >>>to
>> > >>> >>>get
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>this
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> bug
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > >>> >>> >> >
>> > >>> >>> >>
>> > >>> >>> >>
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>>
>> > >>> >>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

I didn't get the tag update to cordova-js, that's the issue.

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Simon MacDonald
<si...@gmail.com>wrote:

> The commit:
>
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cordova-js.git;a=commit;h=35f0af286f5b60f42d66a71317a68dbf33153e19
>
> is the one that I did the FileWriter.seek() fix and it is the one tagged
> 1.6.0. Did you grab an already existing cordova.android.js or did you
> rebuild from that commit? Just trying to understand what might have gone
> wrong.
>
> Simon Mac Donald
> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't think Automation would have helped. I grabbed the js that was on
> > the cordova-js 1.6 tag, which is apparently broken.  The only difference
> is
> > that a script would have failed and not me.  We still need to coordinate
> > releases better.
> >
> > BTW where was the test that should have failed for seekTo?
> > On Apr 11, 2012 8:16 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I had to retag Android to 1.6.0. The .js file that Joe added into repo
> > did
> > > not have the fix for FileWriter.seek().
> > >
> > > We really need to make this step part of the packaging of the release.
> If
> > > we had a script that builds all the deliverables and then we go off and
> > > test them would be better than all of us doing our ad hoc builds.
> > >
> > > Simon Mac Donald
> > > http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Retagged Android 1.6.0
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
> > > > >
> > > > > On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js
> > > (and
> > > > > >also a test into mobile spec) today.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we
> > generally
> > > > had
> > > > > >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of
> > > line.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That
> > > certainly
> > > > > >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in.
> > > Gord
> > > > > >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
> > > > > >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move
> on!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
> > > > failing
> > > > > >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care
> > > about
> > > > is
> > > > > >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple
> > > Android
> > > > > >>devices.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
> > > > > >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
> > > > > >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
> > > > > >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing
> > them,
> > > > and
> > > > > >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
> > > > tagging
> > > > > >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
> > > > > >>wondering
> > > > > >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > >>JS
> > > > > >>earlier.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the
> > > contact
> > > > > >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.
>  Testing
> > > > > >>>appears to
> > > > > >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the
> > Galaxy
> > > > > >>>Nexus
> > > > > >>> >and see if I get the same results.
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <
> bowserj@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > > >>> >
> > > > > >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is
> that
> > on
> > > > my
> > > > > >>> >>Galaxy
> > > > > >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
> > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but
> > > only a
> > > > > >>> >>>couple
> > > > > >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy)
> test
> > > > that
> > > > > >>> >>>saves,
> > > > > >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not
> > sure.
> > > > > >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most
> > > people
> > > > > >>> >>>have.  I
> > > > > >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release,
> > IMO.
> > > >  Why
> > > > > >>> >>>did it
> > > > > >>> >>> >jump up like that?
> > > > > >>> >>> >
> > > > > >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <
> fil@adobe.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >
> > > > > >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit
> on
> > > > > >>>Android.
> > > > > >>> >>>21
> > > > > >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
> > > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse
> > says
> > > > the
> > > > > >>> >>>same
> > > > > >>> >>> >>for
> > > > > >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
> > > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
> > > > > >>>directory,
> > > > > >>> >>> then
> > > > > >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
> > > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we
> are
> > > just
> > > > > >>> >>>picking
> > > > > >>> >>> a
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have
> > been
> > > > > >>>working
> > > > > >>> >>> >>with
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
> > > > introducing
> > > > > >>> >>> anything
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >new.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common
> code
> > in
> > > > > >>> >>>cordova-js
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We
> have
> > to
> > > > > >>>stop
> > > > > >>> >>> >>working
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit
> of
> > > this
> > > > > >>> >>>project.
> > > > > >>> >>> >>We
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be
> > > comfortable
> > > > > >>> >>>testing
> > > > > >>> >>> >>on
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android,
> > > what
> > > > > >>> >>>happens?
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> None.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <
> > shazron@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> > None
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <
> > bowserj@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
> > > > > >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> > > > > >>> >>> >>wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <
> fil@adobe.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
> > > > BlackBerry
> > > > > >>> >>>before
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and
> > > then,
> > > > > >>>we
> > > > > >>> >>> >>should be
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> good
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <
> fil@adobe.com
> > >
> > > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The
> > > accel
> > > > > >>> >>>callback
> > > > > >>> >>> >>test
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel
> they
> > > all
> > > > > >>>check
> > > > > >>> >>> >>out, so
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little
> f'ed.
> > > The
> > > > > >>>manual
> > > > > >>> >>> >>tests
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>for
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so
> > there
> > > > > >>>seems
> > > > > >>> >>>to
> > > > > >>> >>> >>be a
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> little
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are
> > > looking
> > > > > >>>into
> > > > > >>> >>> that.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're
> good
> > to
> > > > > >>>tag. We
> > > > > >>> >>> >>pass
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>on
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <
> > fil@adobe.com>
> > > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try
> to
> > > > > >>> >>>reproduce +
> > > > > >>> >>> >>fix
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>what
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my
> > > rush
> > > > to
> > > > > >>> >>>have a
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>long
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
> > > > > >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.
>  I'll
> > > put
> > > > it
> > > > > >>> >>>back
> > > > > >>> >>> >>when
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>we
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew
> > Walters
> > > <
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of
> BB.
> > > > > >>>Seeing
> > > > > >>> >>>some
> > > > > >>> >>> >>odd
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not
> > > sure
> > > > if
> > > > > >>>it
> > > > > >>> >>>is
> > > > > >>> >>> >>my
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>test
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian
> > > LeRoux
> > > > > >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj
> > wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
> > > > > >>>cordova-js
> > > > > >>> >>>and
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18
> tests
> > > > > >>>failing.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the
> rest
> > > in
> > > > > >>>1.7.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <
> > > > fil@adobe.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>> >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone.
> > Just
> > > > > >>>have to
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
> > > > > >>><sh...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>> >>wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a
> > tag
> > > > > >>>reset
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there
> though I
> > > > think
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM,
> Filip
> > > Maj
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the
> > latest
> > > > BB
> > > > > >>> >>>code so
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> let
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before
> > we're
> > > > all
> > > > > >>> >>>good
> > > > > >>> >>> to
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>tag
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon
> MacDonald"
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the
> > 1.6.0
> > > > > >>>tags. We
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
> > > > > >>>shouldn't
> > > > > >>> >>>be a
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>problem
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM,
> > Filip
> > > > Maj
> > > > > >>><
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe
> lays
> > > out.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a
> > tagged
> > > > > >>> >>>cordova.js
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>file is
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the
> manual
> > > > > >>>process
> > > > > >>> >>>of
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>checking
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying
> > the
> > > > file
> > > > > >>> >>>over
> > > > > >>> >>> to
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the
> > concern
> > > > > >>>then
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> the
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
> > > > automatically.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in
> > > cordova-js
> > > > > >>>was
> > > > > >>> >>>added
> > > > > >>> >>> >>4
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>days
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure
> what
> > > > > >>>happened
> > > > > >>> >>> >>there.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being
> > ordered
> > > > > >>> >>>properly
> > > > > >>> >>> >>and
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for
> the
> > > > 1.6.0
> > > > > >>> >>> >>release,
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>that
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
> > > > cordova-js.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the
> > > latest
> > > > > >>>commit
> > > > > >>> >>> >>(that
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are
> at
> > > > least
> > > > > >>>in
> > > > > >>> >>>the
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>right
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into
> > platforms
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the
> platform
> > > > > >>> >>> >>implementations
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f
> > it,
> > > I
> > > > > >>>say we
> > > > > >>> >>> tag
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking
> > cordova-js
> > > > > >>>into
> > > > > >>> >>>the
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>various
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the
> release.
> > >  It
> > > > is
> > > > > >>> >>>also
> > > > > >>> >>> >>error
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each
> repository
> > > > every
> > > > > >>>time
> > > > > >>> >>> >>there
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>is a
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of
> > > sync.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the
> release
> > > > build
> > > > > >>> >>>script
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>handle
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
> > > > testing,
> > > > > >>>we
> > > > > >>> >>>are
> > > > > >>> >>> >>all
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep
> current
> > > in
> > > > > >>>our
> > > > > >>> >>>own
> > > > > >>> >>> >>ways.
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM,
> > > Simon
> > > > > >>> >>>MacDonald
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a
> > zero
> > > > day
> > > > > >>> >>>bug in
> > > > > >>> >>> >>our
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would
> > be
> > > > good
> > > > > >>>to
> > > > > >>> >>>get
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>this
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> bug
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > > >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>>
> > > > > >>> >>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>]

The commit:

https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cordova-js.git;a=commit;h=35f0af286f5b60f42d66a71317a68dbf33153e19

is the one that I did the FileWriter.seek() fix and it is the one tagged
1.6.0. Did you grab an already existing cordova.android.js or did you
rebuild from that commit? Just trying to understand what might have gone
wrong.

Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald


On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't think Automation would have helped. I grabbed the js that was on
> the cordova-js 1.6 tag, which is apparently broken.  The only difference is
> that a script would have failed and not me.  We still need to coordinate
> releases better.
>
> BTW where was the test that should have failed for seekTo?
> On Apr 11, 2012 8:16 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I had to retag Android to 1.6.0. The .js file that Joe added into repo
> did
> > not have the fix for FileWriter.seek().
> >
> > We really need to make this step part of the packaging of the release. If
> > we had a script that builds all the deliverables and then we go off and
> > test them would be better than all of us doing our ad hoc builds.
> >
> > Simon Mac Donald
> > http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Retagged Android 1.6.0
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
> > > >
> > > > On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js
> > (and
> > > > >also a test into mobile spec) today.
> > > > >
> > > > >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we
> generally
> > > had
> > > > >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of
> > line.
> > > > >
> > > > >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That
> > certainly
> > > > >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in.
> > Gord
> > > > >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
> > > > >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
> > > > >
> > > > >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
> > > > >
> > > > >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
> > > failing
> > > > >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care
> > about
> > > is
> > > > >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple
> > Android
> > > > >>devices.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
> > > > >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
> > > > >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
> > > > >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
> > > > >>
> > > > >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing
> them,
> > > and
> > > > >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
> > > tagging
> > > > >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
> > > > >>wondering
> > > > >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed
> in
> > > the
> > > > >>JS
> > > > >>earlier.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the
> > contact
> > > > >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
> > > > >>>appears to
> > > > >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the
> Galaxy
> > > > >>>Nexus
> > > > >>> >and see if I get the same results.
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com
> >
> > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that
> on
> > > my
> > > > >>> >>Galaxy
> > > > >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but
> > only a
> > > > >>> >>>couple
> > > > >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test
> > > that
> > > > >>> >>>saves,
> > > > >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not
> sure.
> > > > >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most
> > people
> > > > >>> >>>have.  I
> > > > >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release,
> IMO.
> > >  Why
> > > > >>> >>>did it
> > > > >>> >>> >jump up like that?
> > > > >>> >>> >
> > > > >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >
> > > > >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
> > > > >>>Android.
> > > > >>> >>>21
> > > > >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
> > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse
> says
> > > the
> > > > >>> >>>same
> > > > >>> >>> >>for
> > > > >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
> > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
> > > > >>>directory,
> > > > >>> >>> then
> > > > >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
> > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are
> > just
> > > > >>> >>>picking
> > > > >>> >>> a
> > > > >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have
> been
> > > > >>>working
> > > > >>> >>> >>with
> > > > >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
> > > introducing
> > > > >>> >>> anything
> > > > >>> >>> >> >new.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code
> in
> > > > >>> >>>cordova-js
> > > > >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have
> to
> > > > >>>stop
> > > > >>> >>> >>working
> > > > >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of
> > this
> > > > >>> >>>project.
> > > > >>> >>> >>We
> > > > >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be
> > comfortable
> > > > >>> >>>testing
> > > > >>> >>> >>on
> > > > >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android,
> > what
> > > > >>> >>>happens?
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
> > > > >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> None.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <
> shazron@gmail.com>
> > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> > None
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <
> bowserj@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
> > > > >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> > > > >>> >>> >>wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
> > > BlackBerry
> > > > >>> >>>before
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and
> > then,
> > > > >>>we
> > > > >>> >>> >>should be
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> good
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fil@adobe.com
> >
> > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The
> > accel
> > > > >>> >>>callback
> > > > >>> >>> >>test
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they
> > all
> > > > >>>check
> > > > >>> >>> >>out, so
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed.
> > The
> > > > >>>manual
> > > > >>> >>> >>tests
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>for
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so
> there
> > > > >>>seems
> > > > >>> >>>to
> > > > >>> >>> >>be a
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> little
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are
> > looking
> > > > >>>into
> > > > >>> >>> that.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good
> to
> > > > >>>tag. We
> > > > >>> >>> >>pass
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>on
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <
> fil@adobe.com>
> > > > >>>wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
> > > > >>> >>>reproduce +
> > > > >>> >>> >>fix
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>what
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my
> > rush
> > > to
> > > > >>> >>>have a
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>long
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
> > > > >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll
> > put
> > > it
> > > > >>> >>>back
> > > > >>> >>> >>when
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>we
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew
> Walters
> > <
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
> > > > >>>Seeing
> > > > >>> >>>some
> > > > >>> >>> >>odd
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not
> > sure
> > > if
> > > > >>>it
> > > > >>> >>>is
> > > > >>> >>> >>my
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>test
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian
> > LeRoux
> > > > >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj
> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
> > > > >>>cordova-js
> > > > >>> >>>and
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
> > > > >>>failing.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest
> > in
> > > > >>>1.7.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <
> > > fil@adobe.com
> > > > >
> > > > >>> >>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone.
> Just
> > > > >>>have to
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
> > > > >>><sh...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>> >>wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a
> tag
> > > > >>>reset
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
> > > think
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip
> > Maj
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the
> latest
> > > BB
> > > > >>> >>>code so
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> let
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before
> we're
> > > all
> > > > >>> >>>good
> > > > >>> >>> to
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>tag
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the
> 1.6.0
> > > > >>>tags. We
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
> > > > >>>shouldn't
> > > > >>> >>>be a
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>problem
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM,
> Filip
> > > Maj
> > > > >>><
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays
> > out.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a
> tagged
> > > > >>> >>>cordova.js
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>file is
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
> > > > >>>process
> > > > >>> >>>of
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>checking
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying
> the
> > > file
> > > > >>> >>>over
> > > > >>> >>> to
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the
> concern
> > > > >>>then
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> the
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
> > > automatically.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in
> > cordova-js
> > > > >>>was
> > > > >>> >>>added
> > > > >>> >>> >>4
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>days
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
> > > > >>>happened
> > > > >>> >>> >>there.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being
> ordered
> > > > >>> >>>properly
> > > > >>> >>> >>and
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the
> > > 1.6.0
> > > > >>> >>> >>release,
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>that
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
> > > cordova-js.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the
> > latest
> > > > >>>commit
> > > > >>> >>> >>(that
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
> > > least
> > > > >>>in
> > > > >>> >>>the
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>right
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into
> platforms
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
> > > > >>> >>> >>implementations
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f
> it,
> > I
> > > > >>>say we
> > > > >>> >>> tag
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking
> cordova-js
> > > > >>>into
> > > > >>> >>>the
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>various
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.
> >  It
> > > is
> > > > >>> >>>also
> > > > >>> >>> >>error
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
> > > every
> > > > >>>time
> > > > >>> >>> >>there
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>is a
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of
> > sync.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
> > > build
> > > > >>> >>>script
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>handle
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
> > > testing,
> > > > >>>we
> > > > >>> >>>are
> > > > >>> >>> >>all
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current
> > in
> > > > >>>our
> > > > >>> >>>own
> > > > >>> >>> >>ways.
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM,
> > Simon
> > > > >>> >>>MacDonald
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a
> zero
> > > day
> > > > >>> >>>bug in
> > > > >>> >>> >>our
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would
> be
> > > good
> > > > >>>to
> > > > >>> >>>get
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>this
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> bug
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>> >>
> > > > >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>>
> > > > >>> >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

Here's the commit Joe

http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cordova-mobile-spec.git;
a=commit;h=0e412704adc642248ce60a57db5d6e6c04d1951a


On 4/11/12 8:47 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I don't think Automation would have helped. I grabbed the js that was on
>the cordova-js 1.6 tag, which is apparently broken.  The only difference
>is
>that a script would have failed and not me.  We still need to coordinate
>releases better.
>
>BTW where was the test that should have failed for seekTo?
>On Apr 11, 2012 8:16 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>> I had to retag Android to 1.6.0. The .js file that Joe added into repo
>>did
>> not have the fix for FileWriter.seek().
>>
>> We really need to make this step part of the packaging of the release.
>>If
>> we had a script that builds all the deliverables and then we go off and
>> test them would be better than all of us doing our ad hoc builds.
>>
>> Simon Mac Donald
>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Retagged Android 1.6.0
>> >
>> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
>> > >
>> > > On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js
>> (and
>> > > >also a test into mobile spec) today.
>> > > >
>> > > >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we
>>generally
>> > had
>> > > >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of
>> line.
>> > > >
>> > > >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That
>> certainly
>> > > >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in.
>> Gord
>> > > >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>> > > >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>> > > >
>> > > >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>> > > >
>> > > >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
>> > failing
>> > > >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care
>> about
>> > is
>> > > >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple
>> Android
>> > > >>devices.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>> > > >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>> > > >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>> > > >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>> > > >>
>> > > >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing
>>them,
>> > and
>> > > >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
>> > tagging
>> > > >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>> > > >>wondering
>> > > >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed
>>in
>> > the
>> > > >>JS
>> > > >>earlier.
>> > > >>
>> > > >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the
>> contact
>> > > >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>> > > >>>appears to
>> > > >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the
>>Galaxy
>> > > >>>Nexus
>> > > >>> >and see if I get the same results.
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser
>><bo...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>>wrote:
>> > > >>> >
>> > > >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is
>>that on
>> > my
>> > > >>> >>Galaxy
>> > > >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but
>> only a
>> > > >>> >>>couple
>> > > >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy)
>>test
>> > that
>> > > >>> >>>saves,
>> > > >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not
>>sure.
>> > > >>> >>>
>> > > >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>>
>> > > >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most
>> people
>> > > >>> >>>have.  I
>> > > >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release,
>>IMO.
>> >  Why
>> > > >>> >>>did it
>> > > >>> >>> >jump up like that?
>> > > >>> >>> >
>> > > >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >
>> > > >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit
>>on
>> > > >>>Android.
>> > > >>> >>>21
>> > > >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>> > > >>> >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse
>>says
>> > the
>> > > >>> >>>same
>> > > >>> >>> >>for
>> > > >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>> > > >>> >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>> > > >>>directory,
>> > > >>> >>> then
>> > > >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
>> > > >>> >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are
>> just
>> > > >>> >>>picking
>> > > >>> >>> a
>> > > >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have
>>been
>> > > >>>working
>> > > >>> >>> >>with
>> > > >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
>> > introducing
>> > > >>> >>> anything
>> > > >>> >>> >> >new.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common
>>code in
>> > > >>> >>>cordova-js
>> > > >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We
>>have to
>> > > >>>stop
>> > > >>> >>> >>working
>> > > >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of
>> this
>> > > >>> >>>project.
>> > > >>> >>> >>We
>> > > >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be
>> comfortable
>> > > >>> >>>testing
>> > > >>> >>> >>on
>> > > >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android,
>> what
>> > > >>> >>>happens?
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>> > > >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> None.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron
>><sh...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>>wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> > None
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser"
>><bowserj@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > >>>wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>> > > >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> > > >>> >>> >>wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
>> > BlackBerry
>> > > >>> >>>before
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and
>> then,
>> > > >>>we
>> > > >>> >>> >>should be
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> good
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj"
>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> > > >>>wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The
>> accel
>> > > >>> >>>callback
>> > > >>> >>> >>test
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they
>> all
>> > > >>>check
>> > > >>> >>> >>out, so
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed.
>> The
>> > > >>>manual
>> > > >>> >>> >>tests
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>for
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so
>>there
>> > > >>>seems
>> > > >>> >>>to
>> > > >>> >>> >>be a
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> little
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are
>> looking
>> > > >>>into
>> > > >>> >>> that.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're
>>good to
>> > > >>>tag. We
>> > > >>> >>> >>pass
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>on
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj"
>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> > > >>>wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try
>>to
>> > > >>> >>>reproduce +
>> > > >>> >>> >>fix
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>what
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my
>> rush
>> > to
>> > > >>> >>>have a
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>long
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>> > > >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll
>> put
>> > it
>> > > >>> >>>back
>> > > >>> >>> >>when
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>we
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew
>>Walters
>> <
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
>> > > >>>Seeing
>> > > >>> >>>some
>> > > >>> >>> >>odd
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not
>> sure
>> > if
>> > > >>>it
>> > > >>> >>>is
>> > > >>> >>> >>my
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>test
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian
>> LeRoux
>> > > >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj
>>wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
>> > > >>>cordova-js
>> > > >>> >>>and
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>> > > >>>failing.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the
>>rest
>> in
>> > > >>>1.7.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <
>> > fil@adobe.com
>> > > >
>> > > >>> >>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone.
>>Just
>> > > >>>have to
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>> > > >>><sh...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> >>> >>wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a
>>tag
>> > > >>>reset
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though
>>I
>> > think
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip
>> Maj
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the
>>latest
>> > BB
>> > > >>> >>>code so
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> let
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before
>>we're
>> > all
>> > > >>> >>>good
>> > > >>> >>> to
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>tag
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the
>>1.6.0
>> > > >>>tags. We
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>> > > >>>shouldn't
>> > > >>> >>>be a
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>problem
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM,
>>Filip
>> > Maj
>> > > >>><
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays
>> out.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a
>>tagged
>> > > >>> >>>cordova.js
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>file is
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the
>>manual
>> > > >>>process
>> > > >>> >>>of
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>checking
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying
>>the
>> > file
>> > > >>> >>>over
>> > > >>> >>> to
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the
>>concern
>> > > >>>then
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> the
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
>> > automatically.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in
>> cordova-js
>> > > >>>was
>> > > >>> >>>added
>> > > >>> >>> >>4
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>days
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure
>>what
>> > > >>>happened
>> > > >>> >>> >>there.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being
>>ordered
>> > > >>> >>>properly
>> > > >>> >>> >>and
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for
>>the
>> > 1.6.0
>> > > >>> >>> >>release,
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>that
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
>> > cordova-js.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the
>> latest
>> > > >>>commit
>> > > >>> >>> >>(that
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
>> > least
>> > > >>>in
>> > > >>> >>>the
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>right
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into
>>platforms
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the
>>platform
>> > > >>> >>> >>implementations
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f
>>it,
>> I
>> > > >>>say we
>> > > >>> >>> tag
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking
>>cordova-js
>> > > >>>into
>> > > >>> >>>the
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>various
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.
>>  It
>> > is
>> > > >>> >>>also
>> > > >>> >>> >>error
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
>> > every
>> > > >>>time
>> > > >>> >>> >>there
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>is a
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of
>> sync.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
>> > build
>> > > >>> >>>script
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>handle
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
>> > testing,
>> > > >>>we
>> > > >>> >>>are
>> > > >>> >>> >>all
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep
>>current
>> in
>> > > >>>our
>> > > >>> >>>own
>> > > >>> >>> >>ways.
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM,
>> Simon
>> > > >>> >>>MacDonald
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a
>>zero
>> > day
>> > > >>> >>>bug in
>> > > >>> >>> >>our
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would
>>be
>> > good
>> > > >>>to
>> > > >>> >>>get
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>this
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> bug
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
>> > > >>> >>> >> >
>> > > >>> >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>> >>
>> > > >>> >>>
>> > > >>> >>>
>> > > >>> >>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >>>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

I don't think Automation would have helped. I grabbed the js that was on
the cordova-js 1.6 tag, which is apparently broken.  The only difference is
that a script would have failed and not me.  We still need to coordinate
releases better.

BTW where was the test that should have failed for seekTo?
On Apr 11, 2012 8:16 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I had to retag Android to 1.6.0. The .js file that Joe added into repo did
> not have the fix for FileWriter.seek().
>
> We really need to make this step part of the packaging of the release. If
> we had a script that builds all the deliverables and then we go off and
> test them would be better than all of us doing our ad hoc builds.
>
> Simon Mac Donald
> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Retagged Android 1.6.0
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
> > >
> > > On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js
> (and
> > > >also a test into mobile spec) today.
> > > >
> > > >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally
> > had
> > > >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of
> line.
> > > >
> > > >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That
> certainly
> > > >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in.
> Gord
> > > >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
> > > >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
> > > >
> > > >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
> > > >
> > > >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
> > failing
> > > >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care
> about
> > is
> > > >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple
> Android
> > > >>devices.
> > > >>
> > > >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
> > > >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
> > > >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
> > > >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
> > > >>
> > > >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them,
> > and
> > > >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
> > tagging
> > > >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
> > > >>wondering
> > > >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
> > > >>
> > > >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in
> > the
> > > >>JS
> > > >>earlier.
> > > >>
> > > >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the
> contact
> > > >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
> > > >>>appears to
> > > >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
> > > >>>Nexus
> > > >>> >and see if I get the same results.
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> > > >>>wrote:
> > > >>> >
> > > >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on
> > my
> > > >>> >>Galaxy
> > > >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but
> only a
> > > >>> >>>couple
> > > >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test
> > that
> > > >>> >>>saves,
> > > >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
> > > >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most
> people
> > > >>> >>>have.  I
> > > >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.
> >  Why
> > > >>> >>>did it
> > > >>> >>> >jump up like that?
> > > >>> >>> >
> > > >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >
> > > >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
> > > >>>Android.
> > > >>> >>>21
> > > >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
> > > >>> >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says
> > the
> > > >>> >>>same
> > > >>> >>> >>for
> > > >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
> > > >>> >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
> > > >>>directory,
> > > >>> >>> then
> > > >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
> > > >>> >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are
> just
> > > >>> >>>picking
> > > >>> >>> a
> > > >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
> > > >>>working
> > > >>> >>> >>with
> > > >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
> > introducing
> > > >>> >>> anything
> > > >>> >>> >> >new.
> > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
> > > >>> >>>cordova-js
> > > >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to
> > > >>>stop
> > > >>> >>> >>working
> > > >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of
> this
> > > >>> >>>project.
> > > >>> >>> >>We
> > > >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be
> comfortable
> > > >>> >>>testing
> > > >>> >>> >>on
> > > >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
> > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android,
> what
> > > >>> >>>happens?
> > > >>> >>> >> >>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
> > > >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> None.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> > > >>>wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> > None
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bowserj@gmail.com
> >
> > > >>>wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
> > > >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> > > >>> >>> >>wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
> > BlackBerry
> > > >>> >>>before
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and
> then,
> > > >>>we
> > > >>> >>> >>should be
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> good
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> > > >>>wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The
> accel
> > > >>> >>>callback
> > > >>> >>> >>test
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they
> all
> > > >>>check
> > > >>> >>> >>out, so
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed.
> The
> > > >>>manual
> > > >>> >>> >>tests
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>for
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
> > > >>>seems
> > > >>> >>>to
> > > >>> >>> >>be a
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> little
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are
> looking
> > > >>>into
> > > >>> >>> that.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
> > > >>>tag. We
> > > >>> >>> >>pass
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>on
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> > > >>>wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
> > > >>> >>>reproduce +
> > > >>> >>> >>fix
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>what
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
> > > >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my
> rush
> > to
> > > >>> >>>have a
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>long
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
> > > >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll
> put
> > it
> > > >>> >>>back
> > > >>> >>> >>when
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>we
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters
> <
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
> > > >>>Seeing
> > > >>> >>>some
> > > >>> >>> >>odd
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not
> sure
> > if
> > > >>>it
> > > >>> >>>is
> > > >>> >>> >>my
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>test
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian
> LeRoux
> > > >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
> > > >>>cordova-js
> > > >>> >>>and
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
> > > >>>failing.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest
> in
> > > >>>1.7.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <
> > fil@adobe.com
> > > >
> > > >>> >>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
> > > >>>have to
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
> > > >>><sh...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>> >>wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
> > > >>>reset
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
> > think
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip
> Maj
> > > >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest
> > BB
> > > >>> >>>code so
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> let
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're
> > all
> > > >>> >>>good
> > > >>> >>> to
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>tag
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
> > > >>>tags. We
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
> > > >>>shouldn't
> > > >>> >>>be a
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>problem
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip
> > Maj
> > > >>><
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays
> out.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
> > > >>> >>>cordova.js
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>file is
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
> > > >>>process
> > > >>> >>>of
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>checking
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the
> > file
> > > >>> >>>over
> > > >>> >>> to
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern
> > > >>>then
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> the
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
> > automatically.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in
> cordova-js
> > > >>>was
> > > >>> >>>added
> > > >>> >>> >>4
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>days
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
> > > >>>happened
> > > >>> >>> >>there.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
> > > >>> >>>properly
> > > >>> >>> >>and
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the
> > 1.6.0
> > > >>> >>> >>release,
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>that
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
> > cordova-js.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the
> latest
> > > >>>commit
> > > >>> >>> >>(that
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
> > least
> > > >>>in
> > > >>> >>>the
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>right
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
> > > >>> >>> >>implementations
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it,
> I
> > > >>>say we
> > > >>> >>> tag
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
> > > >>>into
> > > >>> >>>the
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>various
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.
>  It
> > is
> > > >>> >>>also
> > > >>> >>> >>error
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
> > every
> > > >>>time
> > > >>> >>> >>there
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>is a
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of
> sync.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
> > build
> > > >>> >>>script
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>handle
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
> > testing,
> > > >>>we
> > > >>> >>>are
> > > >>> >>> >>all
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current
> in
> > > >>>our
> > > >>> >>>own
> > > >>> >>> >>ways.
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM,
> Simon
> > > >>> >>>MacDonald
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero
> > day
> > > >>> >>>bug in
> > > >>> >>> >>our
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be
> > good
> > > >>>to
> > > >>> >>>get
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>this
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> bug
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > > >>> >>> >> >
> > > >>> >>> >>
> > > >>> >>> >>
> > > >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>>
> > > >>> >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>]

I had to retag Android to 1.6.0. The .js file that Joe added into repo did
not have the fix for FileWriter.seek().

We really need to make this step part of the packaging of the release. If
we had a script that builds all the deliverables and then we go off and
test them would be better than all of us doing our ad hoc builds.

Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald


On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Retagged Android 1.6.0
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> > Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
> >
> > On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
> > >also a test into mobile spec) today.
> > >
> > >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally
> had
> > >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
> > >
> > >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
> > >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
> > >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
> > >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
> > >
> > >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
> > >
> > >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
> failing
> > >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about
> is
> > >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
> > >>devices.
> > >>
> > >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
> > >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
> > >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
> > >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
> > >>
> > >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them,
> and
> > >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
> tagging
> > >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
> > >>wondering
> > >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
> > >>
> > >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in
> the
> > >>JS
> > >>earlier.
> > >>
> > >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
> > >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
> > >>>
> > >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
> > >>>
> > >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
> > >>>
> > >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
> > >>>appears to
> > >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
> > >>>Nexus
> > >>> >and see if I get the same results.
> > >>> >
> > >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> > >>>wrote:
> > >>> >
> > >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on
> my
> > >>> >>Galaxy
> > >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> wrote:
> > >>> >>
> > >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
> > >>> >>>couple
> > >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test
> that
> > >>> >>>saves,
> > >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
> > >>> >>>have.  I
> > >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.
>  Why
> > >>> >>>did it
> > >>> >>> >jump up like that?
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>> >>> >
> > >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
> > >>>Android.
> > >>> >>>21
> > >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
> > >>> >>> >>
> > >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says
> the
> > >>> >>>same
> > >>> >>> >>for
> > >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
> > >>> >>> >>
> > >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
> > >>>directory,
> > >>> >>> then
> > >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
> > >>> >>> >>
> > >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >>
> > >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
> > >>> >>>picking
> > >>> >>> a
> > >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
> > >>>working
> > >>> >>> >>with
> > >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
> introducing
> > >>> >>> anything
> > >>> >>> >> >new.
> > >>> >>> >> >
> > >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
> > >>> >>>cordova-js
> > >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to
> > >>>stop
> > >>> >>> >>working
> > >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
> > >>> >>>project.
> > >>> >>> >>We
> > >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
> > >>> >>>testing
> > >>> >>> >>on
> > >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
> > >>> >>> >> >
> > >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >
> > >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
> > >>> >>>happens?
> > >>> >>> >> >>
> > >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
> > >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> None.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
> > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
> > >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
> > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> > >>>wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> > None
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >
> > >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
> > >>>wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
> > >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> > >>> >>> >>wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
> BlackBerry
> > >>> >>>before
> > >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then,
> > >>>we
> > >>> >>> >>should be
> > >>> >>> >> >>> good
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> > >>>wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
> > >>> >>>callback
> > >>> >>> >>test
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
> > >>>check
> > >>> >>> >>out, so
> > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
> > >>>manual
> > >>> >>> >>tests
> > >>> >>> >> >>>for
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
> > >>>seems
> > >>> >>>to
> > >>> >>> >>be a
> > >>> >>> >> >>> little
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
> > >>>into
> > >>> >>> that.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
> > >>>tag. We
> > >>> >>> >>pass
> > >>> >>> >> >>>on
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> > >>>wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
> > >>> >>>reproduce +
> > >>> >>> >>fix
> > >>> >>> >> >>>what
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
> > >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush
> to
> > >>> >>>have a
> > >>> >>> >> >>>long
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
> > >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put
> it
> > >>> >>>back
> > >>> >>> >>when
> > >>> >>> >> >>>we
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
> > >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
> > >>>Seeing
> > >>> >>>some
> > >>> >>> >>odd
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure
> if
> > >>>it
> > >>> >>>is
> > >>> >>> >>my
> > >>> >>> >> >>>test
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
> > >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
> > >>>cordova-js
> > >>> >>>and
> > >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
> > >>>failing.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
> > >>>1.7.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <
> fil@adobe.com
> > >
> > >>> >>> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
> > >>>have to
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
> > >>><sh...@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>> >>wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
> > >>>reset
> > >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
> think
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
> > >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest
> BB
> > >>> >>>code so
> > >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
> > >>> >>> >> >>> let
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're
> all
> > >>> >>>good
> > >>> >>> to
> > >>> >>> >> >>>tag
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
> > >>>tags. We
> > >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
> > >>>shouldn't
> > >>> >>>be a
> > >>> >>> >> >>>problem
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip
> Maj
> > >>><
> > >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
> > >>> >>>cordova.js
> > >>> >>> >> >>>file is
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
> > >>>process
> > >>> >>>of
> > >>> >>> >> >>>checking
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the
> file
> > >>> >>>over
> > >>> >>> to
> > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern
> > >>>then
> > >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
> > >>> >>> >> >>> the
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
> automatically.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js
> > >>>was
> > >>> >>>added
> > >>> >>> >>4
> > >>> >>> >> >>>days
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
> > >>>happened
> > >>> >>> >>there.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
> > >>> >>>properly
> > >>> >>> >>and
> > >>> >>> >> >>>the
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the
> 1.6.0
> > >>> >>> >>release,
> > >>> >>> >> >>>that
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
> cordova-js.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
> > >>>commit
> > >>> >>> >>(that
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
> least
> > >>>in
> > >>> >>>the
> > >>> >>> >> >>>right
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
> > >>> >>> >>implementations
> > >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
> > >>>say we
> > >>> >>> tag
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
> > >>>into
> > >>> >>>the
> > >>> >>> >> >>>various
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It
> is
> > >>> >>>also
> > >>> >>> >>error
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
> every
> > >>>time
> > >>> >>> >>there
> > >>> >>> >> >>>is a
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
> build
> > >>> >>>script
> > >>> >>> >> >>>handle
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
> testing,
> > >>>we
> > >>> >>>are
> > >>> >>> >>all
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in
> > >>>our
> > >>> >>>own
> > >>> >>> >>ways.
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
> > >>> >>>MacDonald
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero
> day
> > >>> >>>bug in
> > >>> >>> >>our
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be
> good
> > >>>to
> > >>> >>>get
> > >>> >>> >> >>>this
> > >>> >>> >> >>> bug
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> > >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> > >>> >>> >> >>>
> > >>> >>> >> >
> > >>> >>> >>
> > >>> >>> >>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>>
> > >>> >>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >
> >
> >
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

Should I tag blackberry or Drew, you got that?

On 4/10/12 1:27 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Retagged Android 1.6.0
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
>>
>> On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
>> >also a test into mobile spec) today.
>> >
>> >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally
>>had
>> >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>> >
>> >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That
>>certainly
>> >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
>> >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>> >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>> >
>> >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>> >
>> >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least
>>failing
>> >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care
>>about is
>> >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>> >>devices.
>> >>
>> >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>> >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>> >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>> >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>> >>
>> >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them,
>>and
>> >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with
>>tagging
>> >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>> >>wondering
>> >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>> >>
>> >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in
>>the
>> >>JS
>> >>earlier.
>> >>
>> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>> >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>> >>>
>> >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>> >>>
>> >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>> >>>
>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>> >>>appears to
>> >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>> >>>Nexus
>> >>> >and see if I get the same results.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>> >>>wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on
>>my
>> >>> >>Galaxy
>> >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only
>>a
>> >>> >>>couple
>> >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test
>>that
>> >>> >>>saves,
>> >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most
>>people
>> >>> >>>have.  I
>> >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.
>>Why
>> >>> >>>did it
>> >>> >>> >jump up like that?
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>> >>>Android.
>> >>> >>>21
>> >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says
>>the
>> >>> >>>same
>> >>> >>> >>for
>> >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>> >>>directory,
>> >>> >>> then
>> >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are
>>just
>> >>> >>>picking
>> >>> >>> a
>> >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
>> >>>working
>> >>> >>> >>with
>> >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not
>>introducing
>> >>> >>> anything
>> >>> >>> >> >new.
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>> >>> >>>cordova-js
>> >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to
>> >>>stop
>> >>> >>> >>working
>> >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of
>>this
>> >>> >>>project.
>> >>> >>> >>We
>> >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be
>>comfortable
>> >>> >>>testing
>> >>> >>> >>on
>> >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>> >>> >>>happens?
>> >>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>> >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> None.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>> >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>> >>>wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> > None
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>> >>>wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>> >>> >>wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in
>>BlackBerry
>> >>> >>>before
>> >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and
>>then,
>> >>>we
>> >>> >>> >>should be
>> >>> >>> >> >>> good
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>>wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>> >>> >>>callback
>> >>> >>> >>test
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
>> >>>check
>> >>> >>> >>out, so
>> >>> >>> >> >>>the
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>> >>>manual
>> >>> >>> >>tests
>> >>> >>> >> >>>for
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
>> >>>seems
>> >>> >>>to
>> >>> >>> >>be a
>> >>> >>> >> >>> little
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>> >>>into
>> >>> >>> that.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
>> >>>tag. We
>> >>> >>> >>pass
>> >>> >>> >> >>>on
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>>wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>> >>> >>>reproduce +
>> >>> >>> >>fix
>> >>> >>> >> >>>what
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>> >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my
>>rush to
>> >>> >>>have a
>> >>> >>> >> >>>long
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>> >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll
>>put it
>> >>> >>>back
>> >>> >>> >>when
>> >>> >>> >> >>>we
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>> >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
>> >>>Seeing
>> >>> >>>some
>> >>> >>> >>odd
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not
>>sure if
>> >>>it
>> >>> >>>is
>> >>> >>> >>my
>> >>> >>> >> >>>test
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>> >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
>> >>>cordova-js
>> >>> >>>and
>> >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>> >>>failing.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>> >>>1.7.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj"
>><fil@adobe.com
>> >
>> >>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>> >>>have to
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>> >>><sh...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>> >>wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
>> >>>reset
>> >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I
>>think
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>> >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest
>>BB
>> >>> >>>code so
>> >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
>> >>> >>> >> >>> let
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're
>>all
>> >>> >>>good
>> >>> >>> to
>> >>> >>> >> >>>tag
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>> >>>tags. We
>> >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>> >>>shouldn't
>> >>> >>>be a
>> >>> >>> >> >>>problem
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip
>>Maj
>> >>><
>> >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays
>>out.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>> >>> >>>cordova.js
>> >>> >>> >> >>>file is
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>> >>>process
>> >>> >>>of
>> >>> >>> >> >>>checking
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the
>>file
>> >>> >>>over
>> >>> >>> to
>> >>> >>> >> >>>the
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern
>> >>>then
>> >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>> >>> >>> >> >>> the
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that
>>automatically.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js
>> >>>was
>> >>> >>>added
>> >>> >>> >>4
>> >>> >>> >> >>>days
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>> >>>happened
>> >>> >>> >>there.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>> >>> >>>properly
>> >>> >>> >>and
>> >>> >>> >> >>>the
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the
>>1.6.0
>> >>> >>> >>release,
>> >>> >>> >> >>>that
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in
>>cordova-js.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>> >>>commit
>> >>> >>> >>(that
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at
>>least
>> >>>in
>> >>> >>>the
>> >>> >>> >> >>>right
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>> >>> >>> >>implementations
>> >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>> >>>say we
>> >>> >>> tag
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
>> >>>into
>> >>> >>>the
>> >>> >>> >> >>>various
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.
>>It is
>> >>> >>>also
>> >>> >>> >>error
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository
>>every
>> >>>time
>> >>> >>> >>there
>> >>> >>> >> >>>is a
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of
>>sync.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release
>>build
>> >>> >>>script
>> >>> >>> >> >>>handle
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and
>>testing,
>> >>>we
>> >>> >>>are
>> >>> >>> >>all
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in
>> >>>our
>> >>> >>>own
>> >>> >>> >>ways.
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>> >>> >>>MacDonald
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero
>>day
>> >>> >>>bug in
>> >>> >>> >>our
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be
>>good
>> >>>to
>> >>> >>>get
>> >>> >>> >> >>>this
>> >>> >>> >> >>> bug
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >
>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

Retagged Android 1.6.0

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

> Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0
>
> On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> >Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
> >also a test into mobile spec) today.
> >
> >We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally had
> >more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
> >
> >DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
> >should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
> >and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
> >DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
> >
> >Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
> >
> >On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least failing
> >>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about is
> >>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
> >>devices.
> >>
> >>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
> >>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
> >>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
> >>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
> >>
> >>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them, and
> >>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with tagging
> >>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
> >>wondering
> >>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
> >>
> >>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in the
> >>JS
> >>earlier.
> >>
> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
> >>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
> >>>
> >>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
> >>>
> >>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
> >>>
> >>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
> >>>appears to
> >>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
> >>>Nexus
> >>> >and see if I get the same results.
> >>> >
> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my
> >>> >>Galaxy
> >>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
> >>> >>>couple
> >>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that
> >>> >>>saves,
> >>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
> >>> >>>have.  I
> >>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why
> >>> >>>did it
> >>> >>> >jump up like that?
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> wrote:
> >>> >>> >
> >>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
> >>>Android.
> >>> >>>21
> >>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the
> >>> >>>same
> >>> >>> >>for
> >>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
> >>>directory,
> >>> >>> then
> >>> >>> >> tag the docs.
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
> >>> >>>picking
> >>> >>> a
> >>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
> >>>working
> >>> >>> >>with
> >>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing
> >>> >>> anything
> >>> >>> >> >new.
> >>> >>> >> >
> >>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
> >>> >>>cordova-js
> >>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to
> >>>stop
> >>> >>> >>working
> >>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
> >>> >>>project.
> >>> >>> >>We
> >>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
> >>> >>>testing
> >>> >>> >>on
> >>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
> >>> >>> >> >
> >>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >
> >>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
> >>> >>>happens?
> >>> >>> >> >>
> >>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
> >>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>
> >>> >>> >> >>> None.
> >>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
> >>> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
> >>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
> >>> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >>> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> > None
> >>> >>> >> >>> >
> >>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> >>> >>> >>wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry
> >>> >>>before
> >>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then,
> >>>we
> >>> >>> >>should be
> >>> >>> >> >>> good
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
> >>> >>>callback
> >>> >>> >>test
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
> >>>check
> >>> >>> >>out, so
> >>> >>> >> >>>the
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
> >>>manual
> >>> >>> >>tests
> >>> >>> >> >>>for
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
> >>>seems
> >>> >>>to
> >>> >>> >>be a
> >>> >>> >> >>> little
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
> >>>into
> >>> >>> that.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
> >>>tag. We
> >>> >>> >>pass
> >>> >>> >> >>>on
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
> >>> >>>reproduce +
> >>> >>> >>fix
> >>> >>> >> >>>what
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
> >>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to
> >>> >>>have a
> >>> >>> >> >>>long
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
> >>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it
> >>> >>>back
> >>> >>> >>when
> >>> >>> >> >>>we
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
> >>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
> >>>Seeing
> >>> >>>some
> >>> >>> >>odd
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if
> >>>it
> >>> >>>is
> >>> >>> >>my
> >>> >>> >> >>>test
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
> >>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
> >>>cordova-js
> >>> >>>and
> >>> >>> >> >>> integrated
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
> >>>failing.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
> >>>1.7.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fil@adobe.com
> >
> >>> >>> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
> >>>have to
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
> >>><sh...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>> >>wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
> >>>reset
> >>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
> >>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB
> >>> >>>code so
> >>> >>> >> >>>I'll
> >>> >>> >> >>> let
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all
> >>> >>>good
> >>> >>> to
> >>> >>> >> >>>tag
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
> >>>tags. We
> >>> >>> >> >>>haven't
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
> >>>shouldn't
> >>> >>>be a
> >>> >>> >> >>>problem
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj
> >>><
> >>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
> >>> >>>cordova.js
> >>> >>> >> >>>file is
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
> >>>process
> >>> >>>of
> >>> >>> >> >>>checking
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file
> >>> >>>over
> >>> >>> to
> >>> >>> >> >>>the
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern
> >>>then
> >>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
> >>> >>> >> >>> the
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js
> >>>was
> >>> >>>added
> >>> >>> >>4
> >>> >>> >> >>>days
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
> >>>happened
> >>> >>> >>there.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
> >>> >>>properly
> >>> >>> >>and
> >>> >>> >> >>>the
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
> >>> >>> >>release,
> >>> >>> >> >>>that
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
> >>>commit
> >>> >>> >>(that
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least
> >>>in
> >>> >>>the
> >>> >>> >> >>>right
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
> >>> >>> >>implementations
> >>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
> >>>say we
> >>> >>> tag
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
> >>>into
> >>> >>>the
> >>> >>> >> >>>various
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is
> >>> >>>also
> >>> >>> >>error
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every
> >>>time
> >>> >>> >>there
> >>> >>> >> >>>is a
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build
> >>> >>>script
> >>> >>> >> >>>handle
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing,
> >>>we
> >>> >>>are
> >>> >>> >>all
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in
> >>>our
> >>> >>>own
> >>> >>> >>ways.
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
> >>> >>>MacDonald
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day
> >>> >>>bug in
> >>> >>> >>our
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good
> >>>to
> >>> >>>get
> >>> >>> >> >>>this
> >>> >>> >> >>> bug
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>> >> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >>> >> >
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>> >>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

Docs and JS (re)tagged 1.6.0

On 4/10/12 12:37 PM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

>Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
>also a test into mobile spec) today.
>
>We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally had
>more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.
>
>DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
>should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
>and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
>DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.
>
>Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!
>
>On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least failing
>>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about is
>>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>>devices.
>>
>>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>>
>>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them, and
>>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with tagging
>>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>>wondering
>>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>>
>>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in the
>>JS
>>earlier.
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>>>
>>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>>>
>>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>>>appears to
>>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>>>Nexus
>>> >and see if I get the same results.
>>> >
>>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my
>>> >>Galaxy
>>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
>>> >>>couple
>>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that
>>> >>>saves,
>>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
>>> >>>have.  I
>>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why
>>> >>>did it
>>> >>> >jump up like that?
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>>>Android.
>>> >>>21
>>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the
>>> >>>same
>>> >>> >>for
>>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>>>directory,
>>> >>> then
>>> >>> >> tag the docs.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
>>> >>>picking
>>> >>> a
>>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
>>>working
>>> >>> >>with
>>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing
>>> >>> anything
>>> >>> >> >new.
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>>> >>>cordova-js
>>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to
>>>stop
>>> >>> >>working
>>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
>>> >>>project.
>>> >>> >>We
>>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
>>> >>>testing
>>> >>> >>on
>>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>>> >>>happens?
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>> None.
>>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> > None
>>> >>> >> >>> >
>>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry
>>> >>>before
>>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then,
>>>we
>>> >>> >>should be
>>> >>> >> >>> good
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>>> >>>callback
>>> >>> >>test
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
>>>check
>>> >>> >>out, so
>>> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>>>manual
>>> >>> >>tests
>>> >>> >> >>>for
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
>>>seems
>>> >>>to
>>> >>> >>be a
>>> >>> >> >>> little
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>>>into
>>> >>> that.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
>>>tag. We
>>> >>> >>pass
>>> >>> >> >>>on
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>>> >>>reproduce +
>>> >>> >>fix
>>> >>> >> >>>what
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to
>>> >>>have a
>>> >>> >> >>>long
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it
>>> >>>back
>>> >>> >>when
>>> >>> >> >>>we
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.
>>>Seeing
>>> >>>some
>>> >>> >>odd
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if
>>>it
>>> >>>is
>>> >>> >>my
>>> >>> >> >>>test
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from
>>>cordova-js
>>> >>>and
>>> >>> >> >>> integrated
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>>>failing.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>>>1.7.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>>>have to
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>>><sh...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >>wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag
>>>reset
>>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB
>>> >>>code so
>>> >>> >> >>>I'll
>>> >>> >> >>> let
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all
>>> >>>good
>>> >>> to
>>> >>> >> >>>tag
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>>>tags. We
>>> >>> >> >>>haven't
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>>>shouldn't
>>> >>>be a
>>> >>> >> >>>problem
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj
>>><
>>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>>> >>>cordova.js
>>> >>> >> >>>file is
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>>>process
>>> >>>of
>>> >>> >> >>>checking
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file
>>> >>>over
>>> >>> to
>>> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern
>>>then
>>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>>> >>> >> >>> the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js
>>>was
>>> >>>added
>>> >>> >>4
>>> >>> >> >>>days
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>>>happened
>>> >>> >>there.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>>> >>>properly
>>> >>> >>and
>>> >>> >> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
>>> >>> >>release,
>>> >>> >> >>>that
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>>>commit
>>> >>> >>(that
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least
>>>in
>>> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>>right
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>>> >>> >>implementations
>>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>>>say we
>>> >>> tag
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js
>>>into
>>> >>>the
>>> >>> >> >>>various
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is
>>> >>>also
>>> >>> >>error
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every
>>>time
>>> >>> >>there
>>> >>> >> >>>is a
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build
>>> >>>script
>>> >>> >> >>>handle
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing,
>>>we
>>> >>>are
>>> >>> >>all
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in
>>>our
>>> >>>own
>>> >>> >>ways.
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>>> >>>MacDonald
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day
>>> >>>bug in
>>> >>> >>our
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good
>>>to
>>> >>>get
>>> >>> >> >>>this
>>> >>> >> >>> bug
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >>> >> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> >>>
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

Simon fixed a File API seek() issue and dropped it into cordova-js (and
also a test into mobile spec) today.

We've had varying #s of tests passing on Androids before, we generally had
more tests failing on Android 2.x. Don't think this is too out of line.

DirectoryEntry timing out is a bad test to be failing on. That certainly
should be looked into. If it's an easy fix then let's get that in. Gord
and I tested DirectoryEntry on BB7 earlier today and it was fine.
DirectoryEntry was also passing fine on my Android 4.0.2.

Otherwise, let's tag-n-bag!!!1 Note the issues for 1.7 and move on!

On 4/10/12 12:30 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least failing
>consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about is
>the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
>devices.
>
>Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
>Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
>Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
>Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures
>
>All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them, and
>DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with tagging
>this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm
>wondering
>if this is an issue with other platforms as well.
>
>Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in the
>JS
>earlier.
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
>> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>>
>> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>>
>> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>>
>> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing
>>appears to
>> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy
>>Nexus
>> >and see if I get the same results.
>> >
>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my
>> >>Galaxy
>> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
>> >>>couple
>> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that
>> >>>saves,
>> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>> >>>
>> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
>> >>>have.  I
>> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why
>> >>>did it
>> >>> >jump up like that?
>> >>> >
>> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on
>>Android.
>> >>>21
>> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the
>> >>>same
>> >>> >>for
>> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0
>>directory,
>> >>> then
>> >>> >> tag the docs.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
>> >>>picking
>> >>> a
>> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been
>>working
>> >>> >>with
>> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing
>> >>> anything
>> >>> >> >new.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>> >>>cordova-js
>> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop
>> >>> >>working
>> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
>> >>>project.
>> >>> >>We
>> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
>> >>>testing
>> >>> >>on
>> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>> >>>happens?
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>> >> >>
>> >>> >> >>> None.
>> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
>> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> > None
>> >>> >> >>> >
>> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj
>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>> >>wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry
>> >>>before
>> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we
>> >>> >>should be
>> >>> >> >>> good
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>> >>>callback
>> >>> >>test
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all
>>check
>> >>> >>out, so
>> >>> >> >>>the
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The
>>manual
>> >>> >>tests
>> >>> >> >>>for
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there
>>seems
>> >>>to
>> >>> >>be a
>> >>> >> >>> little
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking
>>into
>> >>> that.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to
>>tag. We
>> >>> >>pass
>> >>> >> >>>on
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>> >>>reproduce +
>> >>> >>fix
>> >>> >> >>>what
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to
>> >>>have a
>> >>> >> >>>long
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >> >>>wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it
>> >>>back
>> >>> >>when
>> >>> >> >>>we
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing
>> >>>some
>> >>> >>odd
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if
>>it
>> >>>is
>> >>> >>my
>> >>> >> >>>test
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js
>> >>>and
>> >>> >> >>> integrated
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests
>>failing.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in
>>1.7.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just
>>have to
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron"
>><sh...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
>> >>> >> >>>discussion?
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB
>> >>>code so
>> >>> >> >>>I'll
>> >>> >> >>> let
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all
>> >>>good
>> >>> to
>> >>> >> >>>tag
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0
>>tags. We
>> >>> >> >>>haven't
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there
>>shouldn't
>> >>>be a
>> >>> >> >>>problem
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj
>><
>> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>> >>>cordova.js
>> >>> >> >>>file is
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual
>>process
>> >>>of
>> >>> >> >>>checking
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file
>> >>>over
>> >>> to
>> >>> >> >>>the
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
>> >>> >> >>>certainly,
>> >>> >> >>> the
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was
>> >>>added
>> >>> >>4
>> >>> >> >>>days
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what
>>happened
>> >>> >>there.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>> >>>properly
>> >>> >>and
>> >>> >> >>>the
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
>> >>> >>release,
>> >>> >> >>>that
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest
>>commit
>> >>> >>(that
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least
>>in
>> >>>the
>> >>> >> >>>right
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>> >>> >>implementations
>> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I
>>say we
>> >>> tag
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into
>> >>>the
>> >>> >> >>>various
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is
>> >>>also
>> >>> >>error
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every
>>time
>> >>> >>there
>> >>> >> >>>is a
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build
>> >>>script
>> >>> >> >>>handle
>> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing,
>>we
>> >>>are
>> >>> >>all
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our
>> >>>own
>> >>> >>ways.
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>> >>>MacDonald
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day
>> >>>bug in
>> >>> >>our
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good
>>to
>> >>>get
>> >>> >> >>>this
>> >>> >> >>> bug
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >> >>> >>
>> >>> >> >>>
>> >>> >> >
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

I don't care about contacts right now, because those are at least failing
consistency across the four devices I'm testing.  What I do care about is
the fact that we're getting inconsistent tests across multiple Android
devices.

Samsung Galaxy S II (2.3.4): 9 Failures
Galaxy Nexus (4.0.2): 9 Failures
Motorola RAZR (2.3.5): 17 Failures
Samsung Nexus S (2.3.6): 23 Failures

All these devices were factory reset before we started testing them, and
DirectoryEntry and GeoLocation tests are timing out.  I'm OK with tagging
this, but this is something that needs to be looked into, and I'm wondering
if this is an issue with other platforms as well.

Also, I believe Simon mentioned that there was something he fixed in the JS
earlier.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

> It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
> returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.
>
> Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.
>
> IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.
>
> On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing appears to
> >be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy Nexus
> >and see if I get the same results.
> >
> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my
> >>Galaxy
> >> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
> >>>couple
> >>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that
> >>>saves,
> >>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
> >>>
> >>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
> >>>have.  I
> >>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why
> >>>did it
> >>> >jump up like that?
> >>> >
> >>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on Android.
> >>>21
> >>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the
> >>>same
> >>> >>for
> >>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 directory,
> >>> then
> >>> >> tag the docs.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
> >>>picking
> >>> a
> >>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been working
> >>> >>with
> >>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing
> >>> anything
> >>> >> >new.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
> >>>cordova-js
> >>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop
> >>> >>working
> >>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
> >>>project.
> >>> >>We
> >>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
> >>>testing
> >>> >>on
> >>> >> >all supported platforms.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
> >>>happens?
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
> >>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>> None.
> >>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> Cheers,
> >>> >> >>>  Jesse
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>> > None
> >>> >> >>> >
> >>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> >>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> >>> >> >>> >>
> >>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>
> >>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> >>> >> >>> >>>
> >>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> >>> >>wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry
> >>>before
> >>> >> >>>7.0.. So
> >>> >> >>> >>>> that
> >>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we
> >>> >>should be
> >>> >> >>> good
> >>> >> >>> >>>> to
> >>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
> >>>callback
> >>> >>test
> >>> >> >>> >>>> failed
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check
> >>> >>out, so
> >>> >> >>>the
> >>> >> >>> >>>> 37
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual
> >>> >>tests
> >>> >> >>>for
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems
> >>>to
> >>> >>be a
> >>> >> >>> little
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into
> >>> that.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We
> >>> >>pass
> >>> >> >>>on
> >>> >> >>> >>>> both a
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
> >>>reproduce +
> >>> >>fix
> >>> >> >>>what
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
> >>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to
> >>>have a
> >>> >> >>>long
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
> >>><bo...@gmail.com>
> >>> >> >>>wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it
> >>>back
> >>> >>when
> >>> >> >>>we
> >>> >> >>> >>>> get
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
> >>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing
> >>>some
> >>> >>odd
> >>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it
> >>>is
> >>> >>my
> >>> >> >>>test
> >>> >> >>> >>>> app
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
> >>> >><b...@brian.io>
> >>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js
> >>>and
> >>> >> >>> integrated
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
> >>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
> >>> >> >>>discussion?
> >>> >> >>> >>>> with
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
> >>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB
> >>>code so
> >>> >> >>>I'll
> >>> >> >>> let
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all
> >>>good
> >>> to
> >>> >> >>>tag
> >>> >> >>> >>>> this
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We
> >>> >> >>>haven't
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't
> >>>be a
> >>> >> >>>problem
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
> >>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
> >>>cordova.js
> >>> >> >>>file is
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process
> >>>of
> >>> >> >>>checking
> >>> >> >>> >>>> out
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file
> >>>over
> >>> to
> >>> >> >>>the
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
> >>> >> >>>certainly,
> >>> >> >>> the
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was
> >>>added
> >>> >>4
> >>> >> >>>days
> >>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened
> >>> >>there.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
> >>>properly
> >>> >>and
> >>> >> >>>the
> >>> >> >>> >>>> file
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
> >>> >>release,
> >>> >> >>>that
> >>> >> >>> >>>> we:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit
> >>> >>(that
> >>> >> >>> >>>> includes
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in
> >>>the
> >>> >> >>>right
> >>> >> >>> >>>> order
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
> >>> >>implementations
> >>> >> >>> 1.6.0
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we
> >>> tag
> >>> >> >>> >>>> everything
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> >>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into
> >>>the
> >>> >> >>>various
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is
> >>>also
> >>> >>error
> >>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time
> >>> >>there
> >>> >> >>>is a
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build
> >>>script
> >>> >> >>>handle
> >>> >> >>> >>>> this?
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we
> >>>are
> >>> >>all
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our
> >>>own
> >>> >>ways.
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
> >>>MacDonald
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day
> >>>bug in
> >>> >>our
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to
> >>>get
> >>> >> >>>this
> >>> >> >>> bug
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>>>
> >>> >> >>> >>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

It looks like the first contacts.save test fails because the contact
returned in the save success callback is the wrong one.

Looks like a native Android issue and not a JS issue.

IMO JS and Docs can be tagged.

On 4/10/12 11:55 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing appears to
>be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy Nexus
>and see if I get the same results.
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my
>>Galaxy
>> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a
>>>couple
>>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that
>>>saves,
>>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people
>>>have.  I
>>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why
>>>did it
>>> >jump up like that?
>>> >
>>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on Android.
>>>21
>>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>>> >>
>>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the
>>>same
>>> >>for
>>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 directory,
>>> then
>>> >> tag the docs.
>>> >>
>>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just
>>>picking
>>> a
>>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been working
>>> >>with
>>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing
>>> anything
>>> >> >new.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in
>>>cordova-js
>>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop
>>> >>working
>>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this
>>>project.
>>> >>We
>>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable
>>>testing
>>> >>on
>>> >> >all supported platforms.
>>> >> >
>>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what
>>>happens?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>> None.
>>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Cheers,
>>> >> >>>  Jesse
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> > None
>>> >> >>> >
>>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>
>>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry
>>>before
>>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>>> >> >>> >>>> that
>>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we
>>> >>should be
>>> >> >>> good
>>> >> >>> >>>> to
>>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel
>>>callback
>>> >>test
>>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check
>>> >>out, so
>>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual
>>> >>tests
>>> >> >>>for
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems
>>>to
>>> >>be a
>>> >> >>> little
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into
>>> that.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We
>>> >>pass
>>> >> >>>on
>>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to
>>>reproduce +
>>> >>fix
>>> >> >>>what
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to
>>>have a
>>> >> >>>long
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser
>>><bo...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it
>>>back
>>> >>when
>>> >> >>>we
>>> >> >>> >>>> get
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing
>>>some
>>> >>odd
>>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it
>>>is
>>> >>my
>>> >> >>>test
>>> >> >>> >>>> app
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>>> >><b...@brian.io>
>>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js
>>>and
>>> >> >>> integrated
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com>
>>> >>wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
>>> >> >>>discussion?
>>> >> >>> >>>> with
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB
>>>code so
>>> >> >>>I'll
>>> >> >>> let
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all
>>>good
>>> to
>>> >> >>>tag
>>> >> >>> >>>> this
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We
>>> >> >>>haven't
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't
>>>be a
>>> >> >>>problem
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
>>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged
>>>cordova.js
>>> >> >>>file is
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process
>>>of
>>> >> >>>checking
>>> >> >>> >>>> out
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file
>>>over
>>> to
>>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
>>> >> >>>certainly,
>>> >> >>> the
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was
>>>added
>>> >>4
>>> >> >>>days
>>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened
>>> >>there.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered
>>>properly
>>> >>and
>>> >> >>>the
>>> >> >>> >>>> file
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
>>> >>release,
>>> >> >>>that
>>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit
>>> >>(that
>>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in
>>>the
>>> >> >>>right
>>> >> >>> >>>> order
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>>> >>implementations
>>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we
>>> tag
>>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into
>>>the
>>> >> >>>various
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is
>>>also
>>> >>error
>>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time
>>> >>there
>>> >> >>>is a
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build
>>>script
>>> >> >>>handle
>>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we
>>>are
>>> >>all
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our
>>>own
>>> >>ways.
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon
>>>MacDonald
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day
>>>bug in
>>> >>our
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to
>>>get
>>> >> >>>this
>>> >> >>> bug
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >>>>
>>> >> >>> >>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>>
>>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

OK, I'm getting 9 failures on the Samsung Galaxy S II.  Testing appears to
be completely inconsistent.  I'm going to factory reset the Galaxy Nexus
and see if I get the same results.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my Galaxy
> Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a couple
>> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that saves,
>> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>>
>> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people have.  I
>> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why did it
>> >jump up like that?
>> >
>> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on Android. 21
>> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>> >>
>> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the same
>> >>for
>> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>> >>
>> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 directory,
>> then
>> >> tag the docs.
>> >>
>> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just picking
>> a
>> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been working
>> >>with
>> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing
>> anything
>> >> >new.
>> >> >
>> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in cordova-js
>> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop
>> >>working
>> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this project.
>> >>We
>> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable testing
>> >>on
>> >> >all supported platforms.
>> >> >
>> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what happens?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> None.
>> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Cheers,
>> >> >>>  Jesse
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> > None
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>
>> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before
>> >> >>>7.0.. So
>> >> >>> >>>> that
>> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we
>> >>should be
>> >> >>> good
>> >> >>> >>>> to
>> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback
>> >>test
>> >> >>> >>>> failed
>> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check
>> >>out, so
>> >> >>>the
>> >> >>> >>>> 37
>> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual
>> >>tests
>> >> >>>for
>> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to
>> >>be a
>> >> >>> little
>> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into
>> that.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We
>> >>pass
>> >> >>>on
>> >> >>> >>>> both a
>> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce +
>> >>fix
>> >> >>>what
>> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a
>> >> >>>long
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>>wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back
>> >>when
>> >> >>>we
>> >> >>> >>>> get
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some
>> >>odd
>> >> >>> >>>> behavior
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is
>> >>my
>> >> >>>test
>> >> >>> >>>> app
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>> >><b...@brian.io>
>> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and
>> >> >>> integrated
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com>
>> >>wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
>> >> >>>discussion?
>> >> >>> >>>> with
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so
>> >> >>>I'll
>> >> >>> let
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good
>> to
>> >> >>>tag
>> >> >>> >>>> this
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We
>> >> >>>haven't
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a
>> >> >>>problem
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
>> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js
>> >> >>>file is
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of
>> >> >>>checking
>> >> >>> >>>> out
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over
>> to
>> >> >>>the
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
>> >> >>>certainly,
>> >> >>> the
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added
>> >>4
>> >> >>>days
>> >> >>> >>>> ago,
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened
>> >>there.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly
>> >>and
>> >> >>>the
>> >> >>> >>>> file
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
>> >>release,
>> >> >>>that
>> >> >>> >>>> we:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit
>> >>(that
>> >> >>> >>>> includes
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the
>> >> >>>right
>> >> >>> >>>> order
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>> >>implementations
>> >> >>> 1.6.0
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we
>> tag
>> >> >>> >>>> everything
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the
>> >> >>>various
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also
>> >>error
>> >> >>> >>>> prone -
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time
>> >>there
>> >> >>>is a
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script
>> >> >>>handle
>> >> >>> >>>> this?
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are
>> >>all
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own
>> >>ways.
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in
>> >>our
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get
>> >> >>>this
>> >> >>> bug
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >>>>
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

I'm getting the same thing on Gingerbread.  The thing is that on my Galaxy
Nexus running 4.0.2, I'm only getting 13 failures.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

> Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a couple
> of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that saves,
> searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.
>
> On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people have.  I
> >do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why did it
> >jump up like that?
> >
> >On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> >> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on Android. 21
> >> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
> >>
> >> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the same
> >>for
> >> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
> >>
> >> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 directory, then
> >> tag the docs.
> >>
> >> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just picking a
> >> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been working
> >>with
> >> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing anything
> >> >new.
> >> >
> >> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in cordova-js
> >> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop
> >>working
> >> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this project.
> >>We
> >> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable testing
> >>on
> >> >all supported platforms.
> >> >
> >> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what happens?
> >> >>
> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
> >> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> None.
> >> >>> Is none the new +1?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Cheers,
> >> >>>  Jesse
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > None
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> >> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> >>> >>>
> >> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >>>> Tag?
> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before
> >> >>>7.0.. So
> >> >>> >>>> that
> >> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we
> >>should be
> >> >>> good
> >> >>> >>>> to
> >> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback
> >>test
> >> >>> >>>> failed
> >> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check
> >>out, so
> >> >>>the
> >> >>> >>>> 37
> >> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual
> >>tests
> >> >>>for
> >> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to
> >>be a
> >> >>> little
> >> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We
> >>pass
> >> >>>on
> >> >>> >>>> both a
> >> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce +
> >>fix
> >> >>>what
> >> >>> >>>>>>> you're
> >> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
> >> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a
> >> >>>long
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> >> >>>wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back
> >>when
> >> >>>we
> >> >>> >>>> get
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
> >> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some
> >>odd
> >> >>> >>>> behavior
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is
> >>my
> >> >>>test
> >> >>> >>>> app
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
> >><b...@brian.io>
> >> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and
> >> >>> integrated
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
> >> >>> >>>> remove/retag
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com>
> >>wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
> >> >>>discussion?
> >> >>> >>>> with
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
> >> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so
> >> >>>I'll
> >> >>> let
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to
> >> >>>tag
> >> >>> >>>> this
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We
> >> >>>haven't
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a
> >> >>>problem
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
> >> >>> fil@adobe.com>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js
> >> >>>file is
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of
> >> >>>checking
> >> >>> >>>> out
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to
> >> >>>the
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
> >> >>>certainly,
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added
> >>4
> >> >>>days
> >> >>> >>>> ago,
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened
> >>there.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly
> >>and
> >> >>>the
> >> >>> >>>> file
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
> >>release,
> >> >>>that
> >> >>> >>>> we:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit
> >>(that
> >> >>> >>>> includes
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the
> >> >>>right
> >> >>> >>>> order
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
> >>implementations
> >> >>> 1.6.0
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
> >> >>> >>>> everything
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> >> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the
> >> >>>various
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also
> >>error
> >> >>> >>>> prone -
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time
> >>there
> >> >>>is a
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script
> >> >>>handle
> >> >>> >>>> this?
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are
> >>all
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own
> >>ways.
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in
> >>our
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get
> >> >>>this
> >> >>> bug
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >>>>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >
> >>
> >>
>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

Looks like ICS is having issues with saving a contact, but only a couple
of the tests are failing in that. The round trip (heavy) test that saves,
searches, removes, then searches again passes.. So.. Not sure.

On 4/10/12 11:36 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people have.  I
>do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why did it
>jump up like that?
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on Android. 21
>> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>>
>> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the same
>>for
>> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>>
>> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 directory, then
>> tag the docs.
>>
>> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just picking a
>> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been working
>>with
>> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing anything
>> >new.
>> >
>> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in cordova-js
>> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop
>>working
>> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this project.
>>We
>> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable testing
>>on
>> >all supported platforms.
>> >
>> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what happens?
>> >>
>> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> None.
>> >>> Is none the new +1?
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>> >>>  Jesse
>> >>>
>> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >>>
>> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> > None
>> >>> >
>> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> Tag?
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before
>> >>>7.0.. So
>> >>> >>>> that
>> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we
>>should be
>> >>> good
>> >>> >>>> to
>> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback
>>test
>> >>> >>>> failed
>> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check
>>out, so
>> >>>the
>> >>> >>>> 37
>> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual
>>tests
>> >>>for
>> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to
>>be a
>> >>> little
>> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We
>>pass
>> >>>on
>> >>> >>>> both a
>> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce +
>>fix
>> >>>what
>> >>> >>>>>>> you're
>> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a
>> >>>long
>> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>> >>>wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back
>>when
>> >>>we
>> >>> >>>> get
>> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some
>>odd
>> >>> >>>> behavior
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is
>>my
>> >>>test
>> >>> >>>> app
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux
>><b...@brian.io>
>> >>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and
>> >>> integrated
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>> >>> >>>> remove/retag
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
>> >>>discussion?
>> >>> >>>> with
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so
>> >>>I'll
>> >>> let
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to
>> >>>tag
>> >>> >>>> this
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We
>> >>>haven't
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a
>> >>>problem
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
>> >>> fil@adobe.com>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js
>> >>>file is
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of
>> >>>checking
>> >>> >>>> out
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to
>> >>>the
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
>> >>>certainly,
>> >>> the
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added
>>4
>> >>>days
>> >>> >>>> ago,
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened
>>there.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly
>>and
>> >>>the
>> >>> >>>> file
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0
>>release,
>> >>>that
>> >>> >>>> we:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit
>>(that
>> >>> >>>> includes
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the
>> >>>right
>> >>> >>>> order
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform
>>implementations
>> >>> 1.6.0
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
>> >>> >>>> everything
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the
>> >>>various
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also
>>error
>> >>> >>>> prone -
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time
>>there
>> >>>is a
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script
>> >>>handle
>> >>> >>>> this?
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are
>>all
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own
>>ways.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in
>>our
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get
>> >>>this
>> >>> bug
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>>
>> >
>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

I'm still testing Android 2.3.6, because that's what most people have.  I
do think that 21 tests is rather high for us to release, IMO.  Why did it
jump up like that?

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on Android. 21
> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>
> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the same for
> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>
> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 directory, then
> tag the docs.
>
> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> >We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just picking a
> >new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been working with
> >the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing anything
> >new.
> >
> >Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in cordova-js
> >that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop working
> >in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this project. We
> >write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable testing on
> >all supported platforms.
> >
> >On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what happens?
> >>
> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
> >><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >>> None.
> >>> Is none the new +1?
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>  Jesse
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >>>
> >>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > None
> >>> >
> >>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> >>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>
> >>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> Tag?
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before
> >>>7.0.. So
> >>> >>>> that
> >>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be
> >>> good
> >>> >>>> to
> >>> >>>>> tag, ya?
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test
> >>> >>>> failed
> >>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so
> >>>the
> >>> >>>> 37
> >>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests
> >>>for
> >>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a
> >>> little
> >>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass
> >>>on
> >>> >>>> both a
> >>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix
> >>>what
> >>> >>>>>>> you're
> >>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
> >>><pu...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a
> >>>long
> >>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> >>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when
> >>>we
> >>> >>>> get
> >>> >>>>>>>>> this
> >>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
> >>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd
> >>> >>>> behavior
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my
> >>>test
> >>> >>>> app
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> or
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
> >>> >>>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and
> >>> integrated
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
> >>> >>>> remove/retag
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
> >>>discussion?
> >>> >>>> with
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
> >>><fi...@adobe.com>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so
> >>>I'll
> >>> let
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to
> >>>tag
> >>> >>>> this
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We
> >>>haven't
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a
> >>>problem
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
> >>> fil@adobe.com>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js
> >>>file is
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of
> >>>checking
> >>> >>>> out
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to
> >>>the
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
> >>>certainly,
> >>> the
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4
> >>>days
> >>> >>>> ago,
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and
> >>>the
> >>> >>>> file
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release,
> >>>that
> >>> >>>> we:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that
> >>> >>>> includes
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the
> >>>right
> >>> >>>> order
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations
> >>> 1.6.0
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
> >>> >>>> everything
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> >>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the
> >>>various
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error
> >>> >>>> prone -
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there
> >>>is a
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script
> >>>handle
> >>> >>>> this?
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> far
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get
> >>>this
> >>> bug
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> >>> >>>>>>>>>> into
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>>
> >>> >>>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>>>
> >>> >>
> >>>
> >
>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

Having a crash in one of my upload tests now (Obj-C - it worked well
before, maybe I need to restart Xcode/and/or my computer, who knows),
still fixing (my +1 was for tagging cordova-js)

2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on Android. 21
> failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.
>
> From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the same for
> WP7. I know BB and Android are good.
>
> I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 directory, then
> tag the docs.
>
> On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>>We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just picking a
>>new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been working with
>>the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing anything
>>new.
>>
>>Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in cordova-js
>>that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop working
>>in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this project. We
>>write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable testing on
>>all supported platforms.
>>
>>On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what happens?
>>>
>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> None.
>>>> Is none the new +1?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>  Jesse
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>
>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > None
>>>> >
>>>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Tag?
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before
>>>>7.0.. So
>>>> >>>> that
>>>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be
>>>> good
>>>> >>>> to
>>>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test
>>>> >>>> failed
>>>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so
>>>>the
>>>> >>>> 37
>>>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests
>>>>for
>>>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a
>>>> little
>>>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass
>>>>on
>>>> >>>> both a
>>>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix
>>>>what
>>>> >>>>>>> you're
>>>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a
>>>>long
>>>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>>>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when
>>>>we
>>>> >>>> get
>>>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>>>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd
>>>> >>>> behavior
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my
>>>>test
>>>> >>>> app
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
>>>> >>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and
>>>> integrated
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>>>> >>>> remove/retag
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
>>>>discussion?
>>>> >>>> with
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>>>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so
>>>>I'll
>>>> let
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to
>>>>tag
>>>> >>>> this
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We
>>>>haven't
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a
>>>>problem
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
>>>> fil@adobe.com>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js
>>>>file is
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of
>>>>checking
>>>> >>>> out
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to
>>>>the
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
>>>>certainly,
>>>> the
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4
>>>>days
>>>> >>>> ago,
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and
>>>>the
>>>> >>>> file
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release,
>>>>that
>>>> >>>> we:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that
>>>> >>>> includes
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the
>>>>right
>>>> >>>> order
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations
>>>> 1.6.0
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
>>>> >>>> everything
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the
>>>>various
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error
>>>> >>>> prone -
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there
>>>>is a
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script
>>>>handle
>>>> >>>> this?
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get
>>>>this
>>>> bug
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

All manual tests pass with latest js + framework commit on Android. 21
failed Qunit tests. 4.0.2 Galaxy Nexus.

>From what I can tell Shaz says iOS is good to go, Jesse says the same for
WP7. I know BB and Android are good.

I'm going to tag the JS and update the docs with a 1.6.0 directory, then
tag the docs.

On 4/10/12 11:23 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

>We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just picking a
>new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been working with
>the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing anything
>new.
>
>Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in cordova-js
>that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop working
>in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this project. We
>write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable testing on
>all supported platforms.
>
>On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what happens?
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
>><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> None.
>>> Is none the new +1?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>  Jesse
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>
>>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > None
>>> >
>>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>> >>
>>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Tag?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before
>>>7.0.. So
>>> >>>> that
>>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be
>>> good
>>> >>>> to
>>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test
>>> >>>> failed
>>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so
>>>the
>>> >>>> 37
>>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests
>>>for
>>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a
>>> little
>>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass
>>>on
>>> >>>> both a
>>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix
>>>what
>>> >>>>>>> you're
>>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen"
>>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a
>>>long
>>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when
>>>we
>>> >>>> get
>>> >>>>>>>>> this
>>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd
>>> >>>> behavior
>>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my
>>>test
>>> >>>> app
>>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and
>>> integrated
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>>> >>>> remove/retag
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
>>>discussion?
>>> >>>> with
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>>><fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so
>>>I'll
>>> let
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to
>>>tag
>>> >>>> this
>>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We
>>>haven't
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a
>>>problem
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
>>> fil@adobe.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js
>>>file is
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of
>>>checking
>>> >>>> out
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to
>>>the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then
>>>certainly,
>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4
>>>days
>>> >>>> ago,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and
>>>the
>>> >>>> file
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release,
>>>that
>>> >>>> we:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that
>>> >>>> includes
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the
>>>right
>>> >>>> order
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations
>>> 1.6.0
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
>>> >>>> everything
>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the
>>>various
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error
>>> >>>> prone -
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there
>>>is a
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script
>>>handle
>>> >>>> this?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get
>>>this
>>> bug
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>
>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

We have not committed anything new in cordova-js, we are just picking a
new commit to tag to 1.6.0, so assuming all of us have been working with
the cordova-js master in our platforms, we are not introducing anything
new.

Every time any cordova developer touches the common code in cordova-js
that dev should be testing across all platforms. We have to stop working
in our little native silos; that is not in the spirit of this project. We
write a cross-platform tool, any of us need to be comfortable testing on
all supported platforms.

On 4/10/12 11:05 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what happens?
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
><pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> None.
>> Is none the new +1?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>  Jesse
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>
>> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > None
>> >
>> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>> >>
>> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Tag?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before
>>7.0.. So
>> >>>> that
>> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be
>> good
>> >>>> to
>> >>>>> tag, ya?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test
>> >>>> failed
>> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so
>>the
>> >>>> 37
>> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests
>>for
>> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a
>> little
>> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on
>> >>>> both a
>> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix
>>what
>> >>>>>>> you're
>> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long
>> >>>>>>>> weekend.
>> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
>> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when
>>we
>> >>>> get
>> >>>>>>>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
>> deedubbu@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd
>> >>>> behavior
>> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my
>>test
>> >>>> app
>> >>>>>>>>>> or
>> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and
>> integrated
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>> >>>> remove/retag
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset
>>discussion?
>> >>>> with
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj
>><fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll
>> let
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>> >>>>>>>>>> guys
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag
>> >>>> this
>> >>>>>>>>>> release?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a
>>problem
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>> >>>>>>>>>> that.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
>> fil@adobe.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js
>>file is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>> >>>>>>>>>> prone
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of
>>checking
>> >>>> out
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly,
>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4
>>days
>> >>>> ago,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and
>>the
>> >>>> file
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>> >>>>>>>>>> bug
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release,
>>that
>> >>>> we:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that
>> >>>> includes
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right
>> >>>> order
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations
>> 1.6.0
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
>> >>>> everything
>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the
>>various
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error
>> >>>> prone -
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there
>>is a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>> >>>>>>>>>> takes
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script
>>handle
>> >>>> this?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>> >>>>>>>>>> far
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this
>> bug
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>> >>>>>>>>>> into
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

Sounds good. But if the changes somehow break Android, what happens?

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Jesse MacFadyen
<pu...@gmail.com>wrote:

> None.
> Is none the new +1?
>
> Cheers,
>  Jesse
>
> Sent from my iPhone5
>
> On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > None
> >
> > 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> >> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
> >>
> >> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
> >>>>
> >>>> Tag?
> >>>>
> >>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before 7.0.. So
> >>>> that
> >>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be
> good
> >>>> to
> >>>>> tag, ya?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test
> >>>> failed
> >>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so the
> >>>> 37
> >>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests for
> >>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a
> little
> >>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on
> >>>> both a
> >>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what
> >>>>>>> you're
> >>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long
> >>>>>>>> weekend.
> >>>>>>>> Sorry all.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>>>>  Jesse
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we
> >>>> get
> >>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>> sorted out!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <
> deedubbu@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd
> >>>> behavior
> >>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test
> >>>> app
> >>>>>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>>>> real bug.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and
> integrated
> >>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
> >>>> remove/retag
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
> >>>>>>>>>> IMO
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion?
> >>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll
> let
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
> >>>>>>>>>> guys
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag
> >>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>> release?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
> >>>>>>>>>> that.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <
> fil@adobe.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
> >>>>>>>>>> prone
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking
> >>>> out
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
> >>>>>>>>>> tag in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly,
> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days
> >>>> ago,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the
> >>>> file
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
> >>>>>>>>>> bug
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that
> >>>> we:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that
> >>>> includes
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right
> >>>> order
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations
> 1.6.0
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
> >>>> everything
> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
> >>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error
> >>>> prone -
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
> >>>>>>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
> >>>>>>>>>> takes
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle
> >>>> this?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
> >>>>>>>>>> far
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
> >>>>>>>>>> implementation
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this
> bug
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
> >>>>>>>>>> into
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>]

None.
Is none the new +1?

Cheers,
  Jesse

Sent from my iPhone5

On 2012-04-10, at 11:00 AM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> None
>
> 2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
>> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>>
>> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>>>
>>>> Tag?
>>>>
>>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before 7.0.. So
>>>> that
>>>>> would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be good
>>>> to
>>>>> tag, ya?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test
>>>> failed
>>>>>> but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so the
>>>> 37
>>>>>> failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests for
>>>>>> Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a little
>>>>>> mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on
>>>> both a
>>>>>> 9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No worries Jesse.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what
>>>>>>> you're
>>>>>>> seeing, Drew.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long
>>>>>>>> weekend.
>>>>>>>> Sorry all.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>  Jesse
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we
>>>> get
>>>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>>> sorted out!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd
>>>> behavior
>>>>>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test
>>>> app
>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>> real bug.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated
>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>>>> remove/retag
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0
>>>>>>>>>> IMO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion?
>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>> guys
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag
>>>> this
>>>>>>>>>> release?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> released
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> error
>>>>>>>>>> prone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking
>>>> out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> tag in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days
>>>> ago,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the
>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek
>>>>>>>>>> bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that
>>>> we:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that
>>>> includes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right
>>>> order
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
>>>> everything
>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>>> <cu...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error
>>>> prone -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> change
>>>>>>>>>> takes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle
>>>> this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As
>>>>>>>>>> far
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> building
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>>>>>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fix
>>>>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

None

2012/4/10 Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>:
> I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?
>
> On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>>
>>> Tag?
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before 7.0.. So
>>>that
>>> >would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>>> >
>>> >I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>>> >
>>> >I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be good
>>>to
>>> >tag, ya?
>>> >
>>> >On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test
>>>failed
>>> >>but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so the
>>>37
>>> >>failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>> >>
>>> >>The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>> >>
>>> >>Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests for
>>> >>Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a little
>>> >>mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>>> >>
>>> >>If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on
>>>both a
>>> >>9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>>No worries Jesse.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what
>>> >>>you're
>>> >>>seeing, Drew.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long
>>> >>>>weekend.
>>> >>>>Sorry all.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>Cheers,
>>> >>>>  Jesse
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we
>>>get
>>> >>>>>this
>>> >>>>> sorted out!
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd
>>>behavior
>>> >>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test
>>>app
>>> >>>>>>or
>>> >>>>>> real bug.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
>>>wrote:
>>> >>>>>>> +1
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated
>>> >>>>>>>>with
>>> >>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>>>remove/retag
>>> >>>>>>>>>1.6.0
>>> >>>>>> IMO
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion?
>>>with
>>> >>>>>>>>>>steps
>>> >>>>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>>> take
>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>you
>>> >>>>>> guys
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> know
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag
>>>this
>>> >>>>>> release?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>> >>>>>>>>>>><si...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>released
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>any
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>with
>>> >>>>>> that.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>error
>>> >>>>>> prone
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking
>>>out
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>a
>>> >>>>>> tag in
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>release
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days
>>>ago,
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>but
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the
>>>file
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>seek
>>> >>>>>> bug
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that
>>>we:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that
>>>includes
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right
>>>order
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
>>>everything
>>> >>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>>><cu...@gmail.com>
>>> >>>>>> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error
>>>prone -
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>not
>>> >>>>>> to
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>change
>>> >>>>>> takes
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle
>>>this?
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>As
>>> >>>>>> far
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>building
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>>> >>>>>> implementation
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>fix
>>> >>>>>> into
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

I was gonna tag it 1.6.0.. Objections?

On 4/10/12 10:50 AM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>>
>> Tag?
>>
>> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>> >AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before 7.0.. So
>>that
>> >would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>> >
>> >I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>> >
>> >I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be good
>>to
>> >tag, ya?
>> >
>> >On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test
>>failed
>> >>but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so the
>>37
>> >>failing tests might be a little blown up.
>> >>
>> >>The file API looks fine, Drew.
>> >>
>> >>Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests for
>> >>Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a little
>> >>mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>> >>
>> >>If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on
>>both a
>> >>9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>No worries Jesse.
>> >>>
>> >>>I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what
>> >>>you're
>> >>>seeing, Drew.
>> >>>
>> >>>On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long
>> >>>>weekend.
>> >>>>Sorry all.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Cheers,
>> >>>>  Jesse
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Sent from my iPhone5
>> >>>>
>> >>>>On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we
>>get
>> >>>>>this
>> >>>>> sorted out!
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd
>>behavior
>> >>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test
>>app
>> >>>>>>or
>> >>>>>> real bug.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>
>>wrote:
>> >>>>>>> +1
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated
>> >>>>>>>>with
>> >>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to
>>remove/retag
>> >>>>>>>>>1.6.0
>> >>>>>> IMO
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion?
>>with
>> >>>>>>>>>>steps
>> >>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>> take
>> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let
>> >>>>>>>>>>>you
>> >>>>>> guys
>> >>>>>>>>>>> know
>> >>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag
>>this
>> >>>>>> release?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>> >>>>>>>>>>><si...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>released
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>any
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>with
>> >>>>>> that.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>error
>> >>>>>> prone
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking
>>out
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>a
>> >>>>>> tag in
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>release
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days
>>ago,
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>but
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the
>>file
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>seek
>> >>>>>> bug
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that
>>we:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that
>>includes
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right
>>order
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag
>>everything
>> >>>>>> 1.6.1.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis"
>><cu...@gmail.com>
>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error
>>prone -
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>not
>> >>>>>> to
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>change
>> >>>>>> takes
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle
>>this?
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>As
>> >>>>>> far
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>building
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>> >>>>>> implementation
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>fix
>> >>>>>> into
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

Are you going to tag it 1.6.0? or 1.6.0rc3?

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:50 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

> .... Already notes in docs. Durrr.
>
> Tag?
>
> On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> >AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before 7.0.. So that
> >would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
> >
> >I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
> >
> >I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be good to
> >tag, ya?
> >
> >On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >
> >>37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test failed
> >>but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so the 37
> >>failing tests might be a little blown up.
> >>
> >>The file API looks fine, Drew.
> >>
> >>Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests for
> >>Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a little
> >>mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
> >>
> >>If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on both a
> >>9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
> >>
> >>
> >>On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>No worries Jesse.
> >>>
> >>>I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what
> >>>you're
> >>>seeing, Drew.
> >>>
> >>>On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long
> >>>>weekend.
> >>>>Sorry all.
> >>>>
> >>>>Cheers,
> >>>>  Jesse
> >>>>
> >>>>Sent from my iPhone5
> >>>>
> >>>>On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we get
> >>>>>this
> >>>>> sorted out!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd behavior
> >>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test app
> >>>>>>or
> >>>>>> real bug.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> >>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated
> >>>>>>>>with
> >>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag
> >>>>>>>>>1.6.0
> >>>>>> IMO
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with
> >>>>>>>>>>steps
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>> take
> >>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let
> >>>>>>>>>>>you
> >>>>>> guys
> >>>>>>>>>>> know
> >>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this
> >>>>>> release?
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
> >>>>>>>>>>><si...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't
> >>>>>>>>>>>>released
> >>>>>>>>>>>>any
> >>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem
> >>>>>>>>>>>>with
> >>>>>> that.
> >>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>error
> >>>>>> prone
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>a
> >>>>>> tag in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>release
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>but
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>seek
> >>>>>> bug
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> file
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything
> >>>>>> 1.6.1.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone -
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>not
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>change
> >>>>>> takes
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>As
> >>>>>> far
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>building
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
> >>>>>> implementation
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>fix
> >>>>>> into
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

.... Already notes in docs. Durrr.

Tag?

On 4/10/12 10:48 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

>AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before 7.0.. So that
>would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)
>
>I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.
>
>I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be good to
>tag, ya?
>
>On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>>37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test failed
>>but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so the 37
>>failing tests might be a little blown up.
>>
>>The file API looks fine, Drew.
>>
>>Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests for
>>Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a little
>>mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>>
>>If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on both a
>>9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>>
>>
>>On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>>No worries Jesse.
>>>
>>>I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what
>>>you're
>>>seeing, Drew.
>>>
>>>On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long
>>>>weekend.
>>>>Sorry all.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>  Jesse
>>>>
>>>>Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>
>>>>On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we get
>>>>>this
>>>>> sorted out!
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd behavior
>>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test app
>>>>>>or
>>>>>> real bug.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated
>>>>>>>>with
>>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag
>>>>>>>>>1.6.0
>>>>>> IMO
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with
>>>>>>>>>>steps
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let
>>>>>>>>>>>you
>>>>>> guys
>>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this
>>>>>> release?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>>>>>>>>>><si...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't
>>>>>>>>>>>>released
>>>>>>>>>>>>any
>>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem
>>>>>>>>>>>>with
>>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>error
>>>>>> prone
>>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>> tag in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
>>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>release
>>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file
>>>>>>>>>>>>>seek
>>>>>> bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything
>>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>not
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>change
>>>>>> takes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>As
>>>>>> far
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>building
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>fix
>>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

AhhhŠ actually Compass is not available in BlackBerry before 7.0.. So that
would explain why it's not working on 6.0 :)

I'm going to file an issue for that in JIRA.

I'm going to update the docs to note this, and then, we should be good to
tag, ya?

On 4/10/12 10:44 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

>37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test failed
>but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so the 37
>failing tests might be a little blown up.
>
>The file API looks fine, Drew.
>
>Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests for
>Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a little
>mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.
>
>If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on both a
>9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).
>
>
>On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>>No worries Jesse.
>>
>>I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what
>>you're
>>seeing, Drew.
>>
>>On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long weekend.
>>>Sorry all.
>>>
>>>Cheers,
>>>  Jesse
>>>
>>>Sent from my iPhone5
>>>
>>>On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we get
>>>>this
>>>> sorted out!
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd behavior
>>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test app
>>>>>or
>>>>> real bug.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated
>>>>>>>with
>>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag
>>>>>>>>1.6.0
>>>>> IMO
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with
>>>>>>>>>steps
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you
>>>>> guys
>>>>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this
>>>>> release?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald"
>>>>>>>>>><si...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't
>>>>>>>>>>>released
>>>>>>>>>>>any
>>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with
>>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is
>>>>>>>>>>>>error
>>>>> prone
>>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a
>>>>> tag in
>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
>>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the
>>>>>>>>>>>>release
>>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago,
>>>>>>>>>>>>but
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file
>>>>>>>>>>>>seek
>>>>> bug
>>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes
>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything
>>>>> 1.6.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various
>>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>not
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>change
>>>>> takes
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>As
>>>>> far
>>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix
>>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>>>
>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

37 failing tests on a Torch running 6.0. The accel callback test failed
but when I run the manual tests for accel they all check out, so the 37
failing tests might be a little blown up.

The file API looks fine, Drew.

Looks to me like Compass may be a little f'ed. The manual tests for
Compass keep returning "[object object]" so there seems to be a little
mistake in there somewhere. Gord and I are looking into that.

If we resolve the compass issue IMO we're good to tag. We pass on both a
9900 (runs 7.0) and a Torch (runs 6.0).


On 4/10/12 10:31 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

>No worries Jesse.
>
>I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what you're
>seeing, Drew.
>
>On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long weekend.
>>Sorry all.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>  Jesse
>>
>>Sent from my iPhone5
>>
>>On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we get
>>>this
>>> sorted out!
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd behavior
>>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test app or
>>>> real bug.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>>>>> +1
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated with
>>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag
>>>>>>>1.6.0
>>>> IMO
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with
>>>>>>>>steps
>>>> to
>>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you
>>>> guys
>>>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this
>>>> release?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released
>>>>>>>>>>any
>>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with
>>>> that.
>>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error
>>>> prone
>>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a
>>>> tag in
>>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the
>>>>>>>>>>>release
>>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago,
>>>>>>>>>>>but
>>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file
>>>>>>>>>>>seek
>>>> bug
>>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes
>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything
>>>> 1.6.1.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various
>>>>>>>>>>>>platform
>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone -
>>>>>>>>>>>>not
>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a
>>>>>>>>>>>>change
>>>> takes
>>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?
>>>>>>>>>>>>As
>>>> far
>>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix
>>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

No worries Jesse.

I got my hands on an OS6 device so I'll try to reproduce + fix what you're
seeing, Drew.

On 4/10/12 10:04 AM, "Jesse MacFadyen" <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long weekend.
>Sorry all.
>
>Cheers,
>  Jesse
>
>Sent from my iPhone5
>
>On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we get this
>> sorted out!
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd behavior
>>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test app or
>>> real bug.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated with
>>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag
>>>>>>1.6.0
>>> IMO
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with
>>>>>>>steps
>>> to
>>>>>>> take
>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you
>>> guys
>>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this
>>> release?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released
>>>>>>>>>any
>>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with
>>> that.
>>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>
>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error
>>> prone
>>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a
>>> tag in
>>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the
>>>>>>>>>>release
>>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago,
>>>>>>>>>>but
>>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file
>>>>>>>>>>seek
>>> bug
>>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes
>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything
>>> 1.6.1.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone -
>>>>>>>>>>>not
>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change
>>> takes
>>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?
>>>>>>>>>>>As
>>> far
>>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix
>>> into
>>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>]

I was the over anxious js 1.6 tagger, in my rush to have a long weekend.
Sorry all.

Cheers,
  Jesse

Sent from my iPhone5

On 2012-04-10, at 9:50 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we get this
> sorted out!
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd behavior
>> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test app or
>> real bug.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>>>
>>>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated with
>>>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>>>
>>>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>>>
>>>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>>>
>>>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag 1.6.0
>> IMO
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with steps
>> to
>>>>>> take
>>>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you
>> guys
>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this
>> release?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
>>>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with
>> that.
>>>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error
>> prone
>>>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a
>> tag in
>>>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>>>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release
>>>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
>>>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek
>> bug
>>>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the
>>>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything
>> 1.6.1.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>>>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not
>> to
>>>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change
>> takes
>>>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As
>> far
>>>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
>> implementation
>>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix
>> into
>>>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> platform
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

I deleted the 1.6.0 tag from Android.  I'll put it back when we get this
sorted out!

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd behavior
> all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test app or
> real bug.
>
> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
> >
> >> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated with
> >> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
> >>
> >> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
> >>
> >> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
> >>
> >> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag 1.6.0
> IMO
> >> >
> >> >On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with steps
> to
> >> >>take
> >> >>1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
> >> >>
> >> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you
> guys
> >> >>>know
> >> >>> soon how we're looking there.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this
> release?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
> >> >>>wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
> >> >>>>build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with
> that.
> >> >>>>So I agree with Fil's steps.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>Simon Mac Donald
> >> >>>>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error
> prone
> >> >>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a
> tag in
> >> >>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
> >> >>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release
> >> >>>>>tool
> >> >>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
> >> >>>>>1.6.0rc2
> >> >>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek
> bug
> >> >>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> >> >>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the
> >> >>>>>file
> >> >>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
> >> >>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> >> >>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything
> 1.6.1.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
> >> >>>>>>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not
> to
> >> >>>>>>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change
> takes
> >> >>>>>>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As
> far
> >> >>>>>>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
> >> >>>>>>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
> >> >>>>>><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our
> implementation
> >> >>>>>>>of
> >> >>>>>>>the
> >> >>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix
> into
> >> >>>>>>>all
> >> >>>>>>>the
> >> >>>>>>> platform
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>]

I'm still testing on other versions of BB.  Seeing some odd behavior
all of a sudden in File API on OS 6.  Not sure if it is my test app or
real bug.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:36 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>
>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated with
>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>
>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>
>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>
>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag 1.6.0 IMO
>> >
>> >On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with steps to
>> >>take
>> >>1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>> >>
>> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you guys
>> >>>know
>> >>> soon how we're looking there.
>> >>>
>> >>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this release?
>> >>>
>> >>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
>> >>>wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
>> >>>>build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that.
>> >>>>So I agree with Fil's steps.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Simon Mac Donald
>> >>>>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
>> >>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
>> >>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>> >>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release
>> >>>>>tool
>> >>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
>> >>>>>1.6.0rc2
>> >>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
>> >>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>> >>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the
>> >>>>>file
>> >>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>> >>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> >>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>> >>>>>>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
>> >>>>>>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
>> >>>>>>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
>> >>>>>>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>> >>>>>>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>> >>>>>><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation
>> >>>>>>>of
>> >>>>>>>the
>> >>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into
>> >>>>>>>all
>> >>>>>>>the
>> >>>>>>> platform

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>]

+1

Cheers,
  Jesse

Sent from my iPhone5

On 2012-04-10, at 9:37 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:

> +1
>
> On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:
>
>> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated with
>> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>>
>> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>>
>> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>>
>> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag 1.6.0 IMO
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with steps to
>>>> take
>>>> 1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you guys
>>>>> know
>>>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this release?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
>>>>>> build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that.
>>>>>> So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
>>>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
>>>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>>>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release
>>>>>>> tool
>>>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
>>>>>>> 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
>>>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the
>>>>>>> file
>>>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>>>>>>>> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
>>>>>>>> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
>>>>>>>> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
>>>>>>>> as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>>>>>>> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation
>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into
>>>>>>>>> all
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> platform

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io>]

+1

On Tuesday, April 10, 2012, Filip Maj wrote:

> OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated with
> latest master for blackberry-webworks.
>
> Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.
>
> Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.
>
> On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> >Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag 1.6.0 IMO
> >
> >On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with steps to
> >>take
> >>1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
> >>
> >>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you guys
> >>>know
> >>> soon how we're looking there.
> >>>
> >>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this release?
> >>>
> >>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
> >>>>build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that.
> >>>>So I agree with Fil's steps.
> >>>>
> >>>>Simon Mac Donald
> >>>>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
> >>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
> >>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
> >>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release
> >>>>>tool
> >>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
> >>>>>1.6.0rc2
> >>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
> >>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> >>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the
> >>>>>file
> >>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
> >>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> >>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
> >>>>>>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
> >>>>>>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
> >>>>>>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
> >>>>>>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
> >>>>>>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
> >>>>>><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation
> >>>>>>>of
> >>>>>>>the
> >>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into
> >>>>>>>all
> >>>>>>>the
> >>>>>>> platform

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

OK so I pulled the latest master from cordova-js and integrated with
latest master for blackberry-webworks.

Tested on the 9900, looks good. 18 tests failing.

Tag it - ship it. Let's iron out the rest in 1.7.

On 4/10/12 8:59 AM, "Filip Maj" <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:

>Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag 1.6.0 IMO
>
>On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with steps to
>>take
>>1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you guys
>>>know
>>> soon how we're looking there.
>>>
>>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this release?
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
>>>>build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that.
>>>>So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>>
>>>>Simon Mac Donald
>>>>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
>>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
>>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release
>>>>>tool
>>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>>
>>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
>>>>>1.6.0rc2
>>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>>
>>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
>>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the
>>>>>file
>>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>>
>>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>>>>>>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
>>>>>>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
>>>>>>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
>>>>>>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>>>>>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation
>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into
>>>>>>>all
>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> iOS tagged 1.6.0
>>>>>>>> I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is
>>>>>>>>ok
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>>>>>>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Cheers,
>>>>>>>> >  Jesse
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
>>>>>>>> purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>>> >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>> >>> Jesse
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> Tag now? I can tag
>>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>>> >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>> +1
>>>>>>>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Hey
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be
>>>>>>>>tagged
>>>>>>>> 1.6,
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release
>>>>>>>>1.6,
>>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>> >>> since
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes
>>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>> Cordova
>>>>>>>> >>> JS,
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing
>>>>>>>>released.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova
>>>>>>>>1.6
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we
>>>>>>>>work
>>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>>> >>> the
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> bugs.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a
>>>>>>>>chicken
>>>>>>>>and the
>>>>>>>> >>> egg
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to
>>>>>>>>hold
>>>>>>>>us
>>>>>>>>up a
>>>>>>>> >>> bit.
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

Agree with leaving the RC tags alone. Just have to remove/retag 1.6.0 IMO

On 4/10/12 8:54 AM, "Shazron" <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with steps to
>take
>1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you guys
>>know
>> soon how we're looking there.
>>
>> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this release?
>>
>> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
>>>build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that.
>>>So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>>
>>>Simon Mac Donald
>>>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
>>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
>>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release
>>>>tool
>>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>>
>>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
>>>>1.6.0rc2
>>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>>
>>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
>>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the file
>>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>>
>>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.
>>>>
>>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>>>>>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
>>>>>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
>>>>>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>>
>>>>>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
>>>>>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>>>>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation
>>>>>>of
>>>>>>the
>>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into
>>>>>>all
>>>>>>the
>>>>>> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> iOS tagged 1.6.0
>>>>>>> I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is
>>>>>>>ok
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>>>>>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Cheers,
>>>>>>> >  Jesse
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
>>>>>>> purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> >>> Jesse
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>> Tag now? I can tag
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>>> >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>> +1
>>>>>>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Hey
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be
>>>>>>>tagged
>>>>>>> 1.6,
>>>>>>> >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release
>>>>>>>1.6,
>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>> >>> since
>>>>>>> >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes
>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>> Cordova
>>>>>>> >>> JS,
>>>>>>> >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing
>>>>>>>released.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>>> >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>>>>>>> >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova
>>>>>>>1.6
>>>>>>> >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we
>>>>>>>work
>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>> >>> the
>>>>>>> >>>>>> bugs.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken
>>>>>>>and the
>>>>>>> >>> egg
>>>>>>> >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold
>>>>>>>us
>>>>>>>up a
>>>>>>> >>> bit.
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

Let's wait until BB is done and do a tag reset discussion? with steps to take
1.6.0rc1 should still be there though I think

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you guys know
> soon how we're looking there.
>
> Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this release?
>
> On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
>>build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that.
>>So I agree with Fil's steps.
>>
>>Simon Mac Donald
>>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>
>>
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
>>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
>>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release tool
>>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>>
>>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
>>>1.6.0rc2
>>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>>
>>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
>>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>>
>>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the file
>>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>>
>>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.
>>>
>>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>>>>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
>>>>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
>>>>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>>
>>>>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
>>>>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>>>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>>
>>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>>><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation of
>>>>>the
>>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into all
>>>>>the
>>>>> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.
>>>>>
>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> iOS tagged 1.6.0
>>>>>> I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>>>>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Cheers,
>>>>>> >  Jesse
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
>>>>>> purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Cheers,
>>>>>> >>> Jesse
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>> >>>> Tag now? I can tag
>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>>> >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>> +1
>>>>>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Hey
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be
>>>>>>tagged
>>>>>> 1.6,
>>>>>> >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6,
>>>>>>and
>>>>>> >>> since
>>>>>> >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to
>>>>>> Cordova
>>>>>> >>> JS,
>>>>>> >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>> >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>>>>>> >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>>>>>> >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work
>>>>>> through
>>>>>> >>> the
>>>>>> >>>>>> bugs.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken
>>>>>>and the
>>>>>> >>> egg
>>>>>> >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold
>>>>>>us
>>>>>>up a
>>>>>> >>> bit.
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Joe
>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

I'm in the process of testing the latest BB code so I'll let you guys know
soon how we're looking there.

Is that the last thing need before we're all good to tag this release?

On 4/10/12 8:30 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
>build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that.
>So I agree with Fil's steps.
>
>Simon Mac Donald
>http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>>
>> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
>> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
>> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
>> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release tool
>> should be set up to do that automatically.
>>
>> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but
>>1.6.0rc2
>> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>>
>> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
>> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>>
>> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
>> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the file
>> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
>> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
>> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>>
>> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.
>>
>> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>>>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
>>>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
>>>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>>
>>>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
>>>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>>
>>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>>><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation of
>>>>the
>>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into all
>>>>the
>>>> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.
>>>>
>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> iOS tagged 1.6.0
>>>>> I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>>>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Cheers,
>>>>> >  Jesse
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
>>>>> purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Cheers,
>>>>> >>> Jesse
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>> Tag now? I can tag
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>>>> >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>> +1
>>>>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Hey
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be
>>>>>tagged
>>>>> 1.6,
>>>>> >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6,
>>>>>and
>>>>> >>> since
>>>>> >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to
>>>>> Cordova
>>>>> >>> JS,
>>>>> >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>>>>> >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>>>>> >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>>>>> >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work
>>>>> through
>>>>> >>> the
>>>>> >>>>>> bugs.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken
>>>>>and the
>>>>> >>> egg
>>>>> >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold
>>>>>us
>>>>>up a
>>>>> >>> bit.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Joe
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>]

I think we should delete all the 1.6.0 tags. We haven't released any
build artifacts from 1.6.0 so there shouldn't be a problem with that.
So I agree with Fil's steps.

Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald



On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> I like the general process Joe lays out.
>
> I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
> though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
> cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
> implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release tool
> should be set up to do that automatically.
>
> For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but 1.6.0rc2
> was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.
>
> In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
> creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:
>
> 1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
> 2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the file
> seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
> 3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
> 4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0
>
> If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.
>
> On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
>>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
>>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>>
>>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
>>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>>
>>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
>><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation of
>>>the
>>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into all
>>>the
>>> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.
>>>
>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> iOS tagged 1.6.0
>>>> I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
>>>> >
>>>> > Cheers,
>>>> >  Jesse
>>>> >
>>>> > Sent from my iPhone5
>>>> >
>>>> > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
>>>> purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Cheers,
>>>> >>> Jesse
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> Tag now? I can tag
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>>> >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>> +1
>>>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Hey
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be
>>>>tagged
>>>> 1.6,
>>>> >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6,
>>>>and
>>>> >>> since
>>>> >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to
>>>> Cordova
>>>> >>> JS,
>>>> >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>>>> >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>>>> >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>>>> >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work
>>>> through
>>>> >>> the
>>>> >>>>>> bugs.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken
>>>>and the
>>>> >>> egg
>>>> >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us
>>>>up a
>>>> >>> bit.
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>>>> Joe
>>>> >>>>>>
>>>> >>>
>>>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Patrick Mueller <pm...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:19, Bryce Curtis <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
> repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
> mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
> a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>
> Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
> as during normal development and testing, we are all building
> cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.


Almost seems like the best thing to do is to mark the cordova.js file as a
gitignore, in the platform projects.  If everyone is rebuilding it, in some
kind of live or semi-live fashion in their platform projects, then the
release could also just "do a build" and add it to the archives.  Then it's
NEVER checked in.

Would be kinda weird, as things wouldn't "run out of the box".  Every
platform would need some easy method of building it's cordova.js file in
the right place, and diagnostics going off when you try to run at it's not
there, or whatever.

-- 
Patrick Mueller
http://muellerware.org

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>]

I like the general process Joe lays out.

I'm not sure how vendoring-in a tagged cordova.js file is error prone
though, Bryce. Is it just the manual process of checking out a tag in
cordova-js, building, and copying the file over to the platform
implementation? If this is the concern then certainly, the release tool
should be set up to do that automatically.

For some reason 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js was added 4 days ago, but 1.6.0rc2
was added ~ 1 day ago. Not sure what happened there.

In light of the tags not being ordered properly and the file seek bug
creeping in, I propose, just for the 1.6.0 release, that we:

1) Delete the old 1.6.0 tag in cordova-js.
2) Retag cordova-js 1.6.0 to the latest commit (that includes the file
seek bug fix) - now our tags are at least in the right order
3) rebuild, reintegrate into platforms
4) unfortunately, retag the platform implementations 1.6.0

If retagging is too unholy then f it, I say we tag everything 1.6.1.

On 4/10/12 7:19 AM, "Bryce Curtis" <cu...@gmail.com> wrote:

>As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
>repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
>mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
>a lot of time & can get out of of sync.
>
>Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
>as during normal development and testing, we are all building
>cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.
>
>On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
><si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation of
>>the
>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into all
>>the
>> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.
>>
>> Simon Mac Donald
>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> iOS tagged 1.6.0
>>> I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>><pu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> >  Jesse
>>> >
>>> > Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >
>>> > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
>>> purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Cheers,
>>> >>> Jesse
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> Tag now? I can tag
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>> >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>> +1
>>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Hey
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be
>>>tagged
>>> 1.6,
>>> >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6,
>>>and
>>> >>> since
>>> >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to
>>> Cordova
>>> >>> JS,
>>> >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>>> >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>>> >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>>> >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work
>>> through
>>> >>> the
>>> >>>>>> bugs.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken
>>>and the
>>> >>> egg
>>> >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us
>>>up a
>>> >>> bit.
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>>>> Joe
>>> >>>>>>
>>> >>>
>>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Bryce Curtis <cu...@gmail.com>]

As Joe eluded to, checking cordova-js into the various platform
repositories holds up the release.  It is also error prone - not to
mention pushing to each repository every time there is a change takes
a lot of time & can get out of of sync.

Any thoughts on having the release build script handle this?  As far
as during normal development and testing, we are all building
cordova.js anyway, and keep current in our own ways.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Simon MacDonald
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation of the
> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into all the
> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.
>
> Simon Mac Donald
> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> iOS tagged 1.6.0
>> I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >  Jesse
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone5
>> >
>> > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
>> purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>> >>> Jesse
>> >>>
>> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> >>>
>> >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Tag now? I can tag
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>> >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> +1
>> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hey
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged
>> 1.6,
>> >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and
>> >>> since
>> >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to
>> Cordova
>> >>> JS,
>> >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>> >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>> >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>> >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work
>> through
>> >>> the
>> >>>>>> bugs.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the
>> >>> egg
>> >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a
>> >>> bit.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Joe
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Drew Walters <de...@gmail.com>]

Yeah, just coming back from vacation I was confused to see cordova-js
tagged in this order (oldest to newest):

1.6.0
1.6.0rc2

I also noticed that Android/iOS/WP7 have already been tagged 1.6.0.

After catching up on emails I was under the impression that we were
going to wait for all the platforms to verify cordova-js then tag it
1.6.0.  Then have the platforms tag 1.6.0.

Did I miss something?

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sounds like we should redo the tag or issue a 1.6.1.
>
> Also, the tags aren't in chronological order, WTF?
> On Apr 10, 2012 7:05 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation of the
>> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into all the
>> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.
>>
>> Simon Mac Donald
>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > iOS tagged 1.6.0
>> > I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <purplecabbage@gmail.com
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> > > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
>> > >
>> > > Cheers,
>> > >  Jesse
>> > >
>> > > Sent from my iPhone5
>> > >
>> > > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>> > >>
>> > >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
>> > purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Cheers,
>> > >>> Jesse
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Sent from my iPhone5
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> Tag now? I can tag
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>> > >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>>> +1
>> > >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Hey
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged
>> > 1.6,
>> > >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and
>> > >>> since
>> > >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to
>> > Cordova
>> > >>> JS,
>> > >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>> > >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>> > >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>> > >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work
>> > through
>> > >>> the
>> > >>>>>> bugs.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and
>> the
>> > >>> egg
>> > >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us
>> up a
>> > >>> bit.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Joe
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>
>> >
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

Sounds like we should redo the tag or issue a 1.6.1.

Also, the tags aren't in chronological order, WTF?
On Apr 10, 2012 7:05 AM, "Simon MacDonald" <si...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation of the
> FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into all the
> platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.
>
> Simon Mac Donald
> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > iOS tagged 1.6.0
> > I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <purplecabbage@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >  Jesse
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone5
> > >
> > > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
> > purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers,
> > >>> Jesse
> > >>>
> > >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> > >>>
> > >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Tag now? I can tag
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
> > >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> +1
> > >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Hey
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged
> > 1.6,
> > >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and
> > >>> since
> > >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to
> > Cordova
> > >>> JS,
> > >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
> > >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
> > >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
> > >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work
> > through
> > >>> the
> > >>>>>> bugs.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and
> the
> > >>> egg
> > >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us
> up a
> > >>> bit.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Joe
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>
> >
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>]

I just fixed what seems to be a zero day bug in our implementation of the
FileWriter. If possible it would be good to get this bug fix into all the
platforms as it was part of the Common JS code.

Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald


On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> iOS tagged 1.6.0
> I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
> >
> > Cheers,
> >  Jesse
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone5
> >
> > On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <
> purplecabbage@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Jesse
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >>>
> >>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Tag now? I can tag
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
> >>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> +1
> >>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hey
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged
> 1.6,
> >>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and
> >>> since
> >>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to
> Cordova
> >>> JS,
> >>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
> >>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
> >>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
> >>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work
> through
> >>> the
> >>>>>> bugs.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the
> >>> egg
> >>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a
> >>> bit.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Joe
> >>>>>>
> >>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

iOS tagged 1.6.0
I'll tag cordova-js and cordova-docs once BB reports everything is ok


On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wp7 tagged 1.6.0
>
> Cheers,
>  Jesse
>
> Sent from my iPhone5
>
> On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jesse
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>
>>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tag now? I can tag
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> +1
>>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
>>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and
>>> since
>>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova
>>> JS,
>>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through
>>> the
>>>>>> bugs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the
>>> egg
>>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a
>>> bit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>
>>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>]

Wp7 tagged 1.6.0

Cheers,
  Jesse

Sent from my iPhone5

On 2012-04-09, at 5:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Android has been tagged 1.6.0.
>
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jesse
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>
>> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Tag now? I can tag
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> +1
>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey
>>>>>
>>>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
>>>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and
>> since
>>>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova
>> JS,
>>>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>>>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>>>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>>>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through
>> the
>>>>> bugs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the
>> egg
>>>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a
>> bit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe
>>>>>
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>]

Android has been tagged 1.6.0.

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!
>
> Cheers,
>  Jesse
>
> Sent from my iPhone5
>
> On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Tag now? I can tag
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
> > <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> +1
> >> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hey
> >>>
> >>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
> >>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and
> since
> >>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova
> JS,
> >>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
> >>>
> >>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
> >>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
> >>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
> >>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through
> the
> >>> bugs.
> >>>
> >>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the
> egg
> >>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a
> bit.
> >>>
> >>> Joe
> >>>
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>]

Wp7 is good with using cordovajs. Go for your life!

Cheers,
  Jesse

Sent from my iPhone5

On 2012-04-09, at 4:54 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Tag now? I can tag
>
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
> <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1
>> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey
>>>
>>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
>>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and since
>>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova JS,
>>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>>>
>>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through the
>>> bugs.
>>>
>>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the egg
>>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a bit.
>>>
>>> Joe
>>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

Tag now? I can tag

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Simon MacDonald
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
> On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey
>>
>> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
>> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and since
>> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova JS,
>> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>>
>> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
>> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
>> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
>> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through the
>> bugs.
>>
>> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the egg
>> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a bit.
>>
>> Joe
>>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>]

+1
On Apr 9, 2012 5:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey
>
> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and since
> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova JS,
> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>
> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through the
> bugs.
>
> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the egg
> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a bit.
>
> Joe
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Jesse <pu...@gmail.com>]

+1

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Herm Wong <he...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
> +1
>
> > Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 14:34:30 -0700
> > Subject: Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS
> releases
> > From: anis.kadri@gmail.com
> > To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hey
> > > >
> > > > Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged
> 1.6,
> > > > since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and
> since
> > > > those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to
> Cordova
> > > JS,
> > > > I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
> > > >
> > > > Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
> > > > The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
> > > > If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
> > > > if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work
> through the
> > > > bugs.
> > > >
> > > > Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the
> egg
> > > > thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a
> bit.
> > > >
> > > > Joe
> > >
>
>

RE: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Herm Wong <he...@hotmail.com>]

+1

> Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 14:34:30 -0700
> Subject: Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases
> From: anis.kadri@gmail.com
> To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org
> 
> +1
> 
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > +1
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hey
> > >
> > > Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
> > > since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and since
> > > those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova
> > JS,
> > > I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
> > >
> > > Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
> > > The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
> > > If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
> > > if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through the
> > > bugs.
> > >
> > > Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the egg
> > > thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a bit.
> > >
> > > Joe
> >
 		 	   		  

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Anis KADRI <an...@gmail.com>]

+1

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:29 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hey
> >
> > Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
> > since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and since
> > those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova
> JS,
> > I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
> >
> > Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
> > The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
> > If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
> > if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through the
> > bugs.
> >
> > Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the egg
> > thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a bit.
> >
> > Joe
>

Re: Chicken and the Egg: Proposed process for Corodova JS releases

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

+1

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey
>
> Since both iOS and Android are waiting on Cordova JS to be tagged 1.6,
> since we need to test the tagged js before we can release 1.6, and since
> those tests could fail and cause us to have to make changes to Cordova JS,
> I propose that we do the following to get this thing released.
>
> Cordova-JS tags with a 1.6.0rc2
> The other platforms test the 1.6.0rc2 JS.
> If the tests pass, we tag both cordova-js 1.6 and cordova 1.6
> if the tests fail, we tag the platforms 1.6.0rc2, and we work through the
> bugs.
>
> Does this make sense to everyone? We're kind of in a chicken and the egg
> thing right now with this release, and it's starting to hold us up a bit.
>
> Joe