You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cordova.apache.org by Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com> on 2013/02/13 19:45:54 UTC
device.cordova in 2.3.0 on Win8
I was contacted by someone using Cordova 2.3 on Windows desktop 8, and they said that device.cordova was returning "2.2.0" instead of the expected "2.3.0".
Sure enough, cordova-2.3.0.js (and all its copies) have "2.2.0" hardcoded inside the definition of getDeviceInfo (line 6031) instead of "2.3.0".
In the changeset https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-windows.git;a=commitdiff;h=c2973d277340795df8256b2893c41d27e59689f6#patch2
I see where the hardcoded value went straight from "2.2.0" to "2.4.0" on Jan 23rd, which is well after 2.3.0 was released (in the view search for the string "cordova:").
I don't see a Jira item on this topic.
For the person that contacted me, I'll just ask them to patch their source locally.
Given that we don't generally do x.y.1 releases unless there is a major problem, we'll just let this go? Should I create a Jira item and mark it as "won't fix" to document this, or is this email good enough?
-- Marcel Kinard
Re: device.cordova in 2.3.0 on Win8
Posted by Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>.
Nice! Thanks.
-- Marcel
On Feb 14, 2013, at 1:04 PM, Jesse <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-js.git;a=commit;h=4f39f4f221156d11bbfda6123acb9803937c3eaf
>
Re: device.cordova in 2.3.0 on Win8
Posted by Jesse <pu...@gmail.com>.
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-js.git;a=commit;h=4f39f4f221156d11bbfda6123acb9803937c3eaf
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Jesse <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is good enough. That was my oversight.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I was contacted by someone using Cordova 2.3 on Windows desktop 8, and
>> they said that device.cordova was returning "2.2.0" instead of the expected
>> "2.3.0".
>>
>> Sure enough, cordova-2.3.0.js (and all its copies) have "2.2.0" hardcoded
>> inside the definition of getDeviceInfo (line 6031) instead of "2.3.0".
>>
>> In the changeset
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-windows.git;a=commitdiff;h=c2973d277340795df8256b2893c41d27e59689f6#patch2
>> I see where the hardcoded value went straight from "2.2.0" to "2.4.0" on
>> Jan 23rd, which is well after 2.3.0 was released (in the view search for
>> the string "cordova:").
>>
>> I don't see a Jira item on this topic.
>>
>> For the person that contacted me, I'll just ask them to patch their
>> source locally.
>>
>> Given that we don't generally do x.y.1 releases unless there is a major
>> problem, we'll just let this go? Should I create a Jira item and mark it
>> as "won't fix" to document this, or is this email good enough?
>>
>> -- Marcel Kinard
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> @purplecabbage
> risingj.com
>
--
@purplecabbage
risingj.com
Re: device.cordova in 2.3.0 on Win8
Posted by Jesse <pu...@gmail.com>.
This is good enough. That was my oversight.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was contacted by someone using Cordova 2.3 on Windows desktop 8, and
> they said that device.cordova was returning "2.2.0" instead of the expected
> "2.3.0".
>
> Sure enough, cordova-2.3.0.js (and all its copies) have "2.2.0" hardcoded
> inside the definition of getDeviceInfo (line 6031) instead of "2.3.0".
>
> In the changeset
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cordova-windows.git;a=commitdiff;h=c2973d277340795df8256b2893c41d27e59689f6#patch2
> I see where the hardcoded value went straight from "2.2.0" to "2.4.0" on
> Jan 23rd, which is well after 2.3.0 was released (in the view search for
> the string "cordova:").
>
> I don't see a Jira item on this topic.
>
> For the person that contacted me, I'll just ask them to patch their source
> locally.
>
> Given that we don't generally do x.y.1 releases unless there is a major
> problem, we'll just let this go? Should I create a Jira item and mark it
> as "won't fix" to document this, or is this email good enough?
>
> -- Marcel Kinard
>
>
>
--
@purplecabbage
risingj.com