You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cordova.apache.org by Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> on 2013/06/11 01:19:12 UTC
Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Hey
I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the deprecation
and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
back into Cordova.
I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users the
giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at all.
I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
Joe
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>.
On Jun 17, 2013, at 10:54 AM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Marcel - I like your idea of adding release notes / deprecation notices to
> the docs. Perhaps this could be merged with the upgrade guides?
I think that would work. I put my Cordova consumer hat on and ask the question "the changelog to low-level for me, what changes do I need to be concerned about for my app or my plugin?" The next logical step would be to go to the upgrade guides to see what I need to do to address the topics in the release notes / deprecation notices.
> I've been thinking that it would be a good idea to have a Cordova blog
> where committers could post to. I think an authoritative news source is
> missing right now for Cordova. E.g. release announcements should go there,
> what's new announcements, upgrade guides, new plugin announcements, etc.
+1
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>.
+1
On 6/17/13 9:25 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <ag...@chromium.org> wrote:
>That distinction sounds good :)
>
>
>On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Simon MacDonald
><simon.macdonald@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, I think we do 2.9.x whenever there are critical bug fixes. Should
>> never need to do a 2.10.0 those folks who need new features should move
>>to
>> 3.x.
>>
>>
>> Simon Mac Donald
>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > 2.10 would mean new features, 2.9.x would mean just bugfixes. With
>>that
>> > definition, we can make the release number decision as we evaluate the
>> > reason for a release. I'm hoping to not need a 2.10, since it would
>> imply
>> > people are not using 3.x yet.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
>> > >wrote:
>> >
>> > > Fun time to go on leave :)
>> > >
>> > > Good call on putting back Plugin.java for now.
>> > >
>> > > Definitely agree that we shouldn't have it for 3.0. But! We should
>> point
>> > > out that plugins can copy & paste the file into their own package to
>> make
>> > > old plugins "just work".
>> > >
>> > > Joe - one big thing that got missed in your blog post about
>>converting
>> to
>> > > CordovaPlugin is that the threading model changes. That's actually
>>the
>> > > biggest change in my mind, and plugin devs need to be aware of it.
>>The
>> > > default used to be that all calls were made on a new background
>>thread,
>> > the
>> > > new way is to make the calls on the WebCore thread and have plugins
>> > > delegate to background / ui threads manually.
>> > >
>> > > If we're going to have more 2.x releases, I think it'd make more
>>sense
>> to
>> > > call them 2.10, 2.11 rather than 2.9.x. That said, I don't want to
>> > stretch
>> > > ourselves too thin by trying to maintain two very different
>>branches.
>> > >
>> > > Marcel - I like your idea of adding release notes / deprecation
>>notices
>> > to
>> > > the docs. Perhaps this could be merged with the upgrade guides?
>> > >
>> > > I've been thinking that it would be a good idea to have a Cordova
>>blog
>> > > where committers could post to. I think an authoritative news
>>source is
>> > > missing right now for Cordova. E.g. release announcements should go
>> > there,
>> > > what's new announcements, upgrade guides, new plugin announcements,
>> etc.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Steven Gill
>><st...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > 2.8.1 just got pushed live. The site needs to be rebuilt still. My
>> ruby
>> > > > dependencies are all messed up currently and are preventing me
>>from
>> > > > rebuilding it.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Carlos Santana <
>> csantana23@gmail.com
>> > > > >wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Can we put the website (cordova.io) on Github and accept pull
>> > > requests?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I think this topic is a good one to take a closer look at our
>> website
>> > > > being
>> > > > > the center of information that puts the wiki and docs in a
>>single
>> > > place.
>> > > > > Not saying to merge everything into one single code base or
>>have
>> > > > > duplication but provide more rich information and pointers to
>>docs
>> > and
>> > > > > wiki.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Could have a "Release Notes" for the new version. Today the most
>> > > > effective
>> > > > > way to know what's new is to follow some of the Cordova guys
>>blogs,
>> > and
>> > > > > this doesn't cover all platforms.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > We can start with a place holder now "Get ready for Cordova 3.0
>>!"
>> > > > >
>> > > > > My 2 cents.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Ref:
>> > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/UpdatingTheWebsite
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --Carlos
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Marcel Kinard wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com
>> > > <javascript:;>>
>> > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog
>>posts,
>> > > tweets,
>> > > > > > > google groups.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know
>> how I
>> > > > > > >> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated
>>properly,
>> why
>> > > is
>> > > > > > there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right
>> > things,
>> > > > but
>> > > > > > for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication,
>>here
>> > are
>> > > > > some
>> > > > > > potential ways to improve that:
>> > > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I
>> > think
>> > > > > > Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And
>>Simon
>> > has
>> > > a
>> > > > > blog
>> > > > > > post on this topic.
>> > > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that
>>has:
>> > > > > > - pointers to other places in the docs (i.e.,
>> device.name,
>> > > > > > org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which
>> > things
>> > > > are
>> > > > > > going away. And the history of which things already have gone
>> away.
>> > > > > > - in that detail, the version or date when they are
>>going
>> > > away,
>> > > > > > and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova
>> > > > <platformX>
>> > > > > > Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you
>>don't
>> > break
>> > > > > when
>> > > > > > they do go away.
>> > > > > > - these would move it off the wiki into the docs,
>>because
>> > > > perhaps
>> > > > > > consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should
>>remain
>> on
>> > > the
>> > > > > > wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is
>> really
>> > > > > geared
>> > > > > > to contributors/committers, not consumers.
>> > > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in
>> Cordova
>> > > > x.y".
>> > > > > > Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their
>> > blogs,
>> > > > but
>> > > > > > feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of
>> > making
>> > > > > more
>> > > > > > work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in
>>the
>> > docs
>> > > > (if
>> > > > > > they are OK with that). That can include reminders of
>>deprecation
>> > > hits.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by
>> plugin
>> > > > > authors
>> > > > > > or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the
>> > > > > > @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something
>> > > offered
>> > > > by
>> > > > > > apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of
>>content.
>> > > > Whatever
>> > > > > > it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so
>> > > consumers
>> > > > > > know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back
>>months
>> > > later
>> > > > > and
>> > > > > > look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in
>> 2.2?).
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Comments?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > -- Marcel Kinard
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --
>> > > > > Carlos Santana
>> > > > > <cs...@gmail.com>
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>.
That distinction sounds good :)
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Simon MacDonald <simon.macdonald@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Yeah, I think we do 2.9.x whenever there are critical bug fixes. Should
> never need to do a 2.10.0 those folks who need new features should move to
> 3.x.
>
>
> Simon Mac Donald
> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > 2.10 would mean new features, 2.9.x would mean just bugfixes. With that
> > definition, we can make the release number decision as we evaluate the
> > reason for a release. I'm hoping to not need a 2.10, since it would
> imply
> > people are not using 3.x yet.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Fun time to go on leave :)
> > >
> > > Good call on putting back Plugin.java for now.
> > >
> > > Definitely agree that we shouldn't have it for 3.0. But! We should
> point
> > > out that plugins can copy & paste the file into their own package to
> make
> > > old plugins "just work".
> > >
> > > Joe - one big thing that got missed in your blog post about converting
> to
> > > CordovaPlugin is that the threading model changes. That's actually the
> > > biggest change in my mind, and plugin devs need to be aware of it. The
> > > default used to be that all calls were made on a new background thread,
> > the
> > > new way is to make the calls on the WebCore thread and have plugins
> > > delegate to background / ui threads manually.
> > >
> > > If we're going to have more 2.x releases, I think it'd make more sense
> to
> > > call them 2.10, 2.11 rather than 2.9.x. That said, I don't want to
> > stretch
> > > ourselves too thin by trying to maintain two very different branches.
> > >
> > > Marcel - I like your idea of adding release notes / deprecation notices
> > to
> > > the docs. Perhaps this could be merged with the upgrade guides?
> > >
> > > I've been thinking that it would be a good idea to have a Cordova blog
> > > where committers could post to. I think an authoritative news source is
> > > missing right now for Cordova. E.g. release announcements should go
> > there,
> > > what's new announcements, upgrade guides, new plugin announcements,
> etc.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 2.8.1 just got pushed live. The site needs to be rebuilt still. My
> ruby
> > > > dependencies are all messed up currently and are preventing me from
> > > > rebuilding it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Carlos Santana <
> csantana23@gmail.com
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Can we put the website (cordova.io) on Github and accept pull
> > > requests?
> > > > >
> > > > > I think this topic is a good one to take a closer look at our
> website
> > > > being
> > > > > the center of information that puts the wiki and docs in a single
> > > place.
> > > > > Not saying to merge everything into one single code base or have
> > > > > duplication but provide more rich information and pointers to docs
> > and
> > > > > wiki.
> > > > >
> > > > > Could have a "Release Notes" for the new version. Today the most
> > > > effective
> > > > > way to know what's new is to follow some of the Cordova guys blogs,
> > and
> > > > > this doesn't cover all platforms.
> > > > >
> > > > > We can start with a place holder now "Get ready for Cordova 3.0 !"
> > > > >
> > > > > My 2 cents.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ref:
> > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/UpdatingTheWebsite
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --Carlos
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com
> > > <javascript:;>>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts,
> > > tweets,
> > > > > > > google groups.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know
> how I
> > > > > > >> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated properly,
> why
> > > is
> > > > > > there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right
> > things,
> > > > but
> > > > > > for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication, here
> > are
> > > > > some
> > > > > > potential ways to improve that:
> > > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I
> > think
> > > > > > Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And Simon
> > has
> > > a
> > > > > blog
> > > > > > post on this topic.
> > > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that has:
> > > > > > - pointers to other places in the docs (i.e.,
> device.name,
> > > > > > org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which
> > things
> > > > are
> > > > > > going away. And the history of which things already have gone
> away.
> > > > > > - in that detail, the version or date when they are going
> > > away,
> > > > > > and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova
> > > > <platformX>
> > > > > > Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you don't
> > break
> > > > > when
> > > > > > they do go away.
> > > > > > - these would move it off the wiki into the docs, because
> > > > perhaps
> > > > > > consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should remain
> on
> > > the
> > > > > > wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is
> really
> > > > > geared
> > > > > > to contributors/committers, not consumers.
> > > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in
> Cordova
> > > > x.y".
> > > > > > Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their
> > blogs,
> > > > but
> > > > > > feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of
> > making
> > > > > more
> > > > > > work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in the
> > docs
> > > > (if
> > > > > > they are OK with that). That can include reminders of deprecation
> > > hits.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by
> plugin
> > > > > authors
> > > > > > or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the
> > > > > > @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something
> > > offered
> > > > by
> > > > > > apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of content.
> > > > Whatever
> > > > > > it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so
> > > consumers
> > > > > > know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back months
> > > later
> > > > > and
> > > > > > look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in
> 2.2?).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Comments?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -- Marcel Kinard
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Carlos Santana
> > > > > <cs...@gmail.com>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>.
Yeah, I think we do 2.9.x whenever there are critical bug fixes. Should
never need to do a 2.10.0 those folks who need new features should move to
3.x.
Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org> wrote:
> 2.10 would mean new features, 2.9.x would mean just bugfixes. With that
> definition, we can make the release number decision as we evaluate the
> reason for a release. I'm hoping to not need a 2.10, since it would imply
> people are not using 3.x yet.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
> >wrote:
>
> > Fun time to go on leave :)
> >
> > Good call on putting back Plugin.java for now.
> >
> > Definitely agree that we shouldn't have it for 3.0. But! We should point
> > out that plugins can copy & paste the file into their own package to make
> > old plugins "just work".
> >
> > Joe - one big thing that got missed in your blog post about converting to
> > CordovaPlugin is that the threading model changes. That's actually the
> > biggest change in my mind, and plugin devs need to be aware of it. The
> > default used to be that all calls were made on a new background thread,
> the
> > new way is to make the calls on the WebCore thread and have plugins
> > delegate to background / ui threads manually.
> >
> > If we're going to have more 2.x releases, I think it'd make more sense to
> > call them 2.10, 2.11 rather than 2.9.x. That said, I don't want to
> stretch
> > ourselves too thin by trying to maintain two very different branches.
> >
> > Marcel - I like your idea of adding release notes / deprecation notices
> to
> > the docs. Perhaps this could be merged with the upgrade guides?
> >
> > I've been thinking that it would be a good idea to have a Cordova blog
> > where committers could post to. I think an authoritative news source is
> > missing right now for Cordova. E.g. release announcements should go
> there,
> > what's new announcements, upgrade guides, new plugin announcements, etc.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > 2.8.1 just got pushed live. The site needs to be rebuilt still. My ruby
> > > dependencies are all messed up currently and are preventing me from
> > > rebuilding it.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Carlos Santana <csantana23@gmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > Can we put the website (cordova.io) on Github and accept pull
> > requests?
> > > >
> > > > I think this topic is a good one to take a closer look at our website
> > > being
> > > > the center of information that puts the wiki and docs in a single
> > place.
> > > > Not saying to merge everything into one single code base or have
> > > > duplication but provide more rich information and pointers to docs
> and
> > > > wiki.
> > > >
> > > > Could have a "Release Notes" for the new version. Today the most
> > > effective
> > > > way to know what's new is to follow some of the Cordova guys blogs,
> and
> > > > this doesn't cover all platforms.
> > > >
> > > > We can start with a place holder now "Get ready for Cordova 3.0 !"
> > > >
> > > > My 2 cents.
> > > >
> > > > Ref:
> > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/UpdatingTheWebsite
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --Carlos
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com
> > <javascript:;>>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts,
> > tweets,
> > > > > > google groups.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
> > > > > >> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated properly, why
> > is
> > > > > there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right
> things,
> > > but
> > > > > for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers.
> > > > >
> > > > > If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication, here
> are
> > > > some
> > > > > potential ways to improve that:
> > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I
> think
> > > > > Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And Simon
> has
> > a
> > > > blog
> > > > > post on this topic.
> > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that has:
> > > > > - pointers to other places in the docs (i.e., device.name,
> > > > > org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which
> things
> > > are
> > > > > going away. And the history of which things already have gone away.
> > > > > - in that detail, the version or date when they are going
> > away,
> > > > > and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova
> > > <platformX>
> > > > > Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you don't
> break
> > > > when
> > > > > they do go away.
> > > > > - these would move it off the wiki into the docs, because
> > > perhaps
> > > > > consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should remain on
> > the
> > > > > wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is really
> > > > geared
> > > > > to contributors/committers, not consumers.
> > > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in Cordova
> > > x.y".
> > > > > Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their
> blogs,
> > > but
> > > > > feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of
> making
> > > > more
> > > > > work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in the
> docs
> > > (if
> > > > > they are OK with that). That can include reminders of deprecation
> > hits.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by plugin
> > > > authors
> > > > > or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the
> > > > > @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something
> > offered
> > > by
> > > > > apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of content.
> > > Whatever
> > > > > it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so
> > consumers
> > > > > know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back months
> > later
> > > > and
> > > > > look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in 2.2?).
> > > > >
> > > > > Comments?
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Marcel Kinard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Carlos Santana
> > > > <cs...@gmail.com>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Michal Mocny <mm...@chromium.org>.
2.10 would mean new features, 2.9.x would mean just bugfixes. With that
definition, we can make the release number decision as we evaluate the
reason for a release. I'm hoping to not need a 2.10, since it would imply
people are not using 3.x yet.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>wrote:
> Fun time to go on leave :)
>
> Good call on putting back Plugin.java for now.
>
> Definitely agree that we shouldn't have it for 3.0. But! We should point
> out that plugins can copy & paste the file into their own package to make
> old plugins "just work".
>
> Joe - one big thing that got missed in your blog post about converting to
> CordovaPlugin is that the threading model changes. That's actually the
> biggest change in my mind, and plugin devs need to be aware of it. The
> default used to be that all calls were made on a new background thread, the
> new way is to make the calls on the WebCore thread and have plugins
> delegate to background / ui threads manually.
>
> If we're going to have more 2.x releases, I think it'd make more sense to
> call them 2.10, 2.11 rather than 2.9.x. That said, I don't want to stretch
> ourselves too thin by trying to maintain two very different branches.
>
> Marcel - I like your idea of adding release notes / deprecation notices to
> the docs. Perhaps this could be merged with the upgrade guides?
>
> I've been thinking that it would be a good idea to have a Cordova blog
> where committers could post to. I think an authoritative news source is
> missing right now for Cordova. E.g. release announcements should go there,
> what's new announcements, upgrade guides, new plugin announcements, etc.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 2.8.1 just got pushed live. The site needs to be rebuilt still. My ruby
> > dependencies are all messed up currently and are preventing me from
> > rebuilding it.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Carlos Santana <csantana23@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Can we put the website (cordova.io) on Github and accept pull
> requests?
> > >
> > > I think this topic is a good one to take a closer look at our website
> > being
> > > the center of information that puts the wiki and docs in a single
> place.
> > > Not saying to merge everything into one single code base or have
> > > duplication but provide more rich information and pointers to docs and
> > > wiki.
> > >
> > > Could have a "Release Notes" for the new version. Today the most
> > effective
> > > way to know what's new is to follow some of the Cordova guys blogs, and
> > > this doesn't cover all platforms.
> > >
> > > We can start with a place holder now "Get ready for Cordova 3.0 !"
> > >
> > > My 2 cents.
> > >
> > > Ref:
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/UpdatingTheWebsite
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --Carlos
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts,
> tweets,
> > > > > google groups.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
> > > > >> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated properly, why
> is
> > > > there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right things,
> > but
> > > > for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers.
> > > >
> > > > If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication, here are
> > > some
> > > > potential ways to improve that:
> > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I think
> > > > Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And Simon has
> a
> > > blog
> > > > post on this topic.
> > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that has:
> > > > - pointers to other places in the docs (i.e., device.name,
> > > > org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which things
> > are
> > > > going away. And the history of which things already have gone away.
> > > > - in that detail, the version or date when they are going
> away,
> > > > and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova
> > <platformX>
> > > > Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you don't break
> > > when
> > > > they do go away.
> > > > - these would move it off the wiki into the docs, because
> > perhaps
> > > > consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should remain on
> the
> > > > wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is really
> > > geared
> > > > to contributors/committers, not consumers.
> > > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in Cordova
> > x.y".
> > > > Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their blogs,
> > but
> > > > feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of making
> > > more
> > > > work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in the docs
> > (if
> > > > they are OK with that). That can include reminders of deprecation
> hits.
> > > >
> > > > Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by plugin
> > > authors
> > > > or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the
> > > > @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something
> offered
> > by
> > > > apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of content.
> > Whatever
> > > > it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so
> consumers
> > > > know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back months
> later
> > > and
> > > > look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in 2.2?).
> > > >
> > > > Comments?
> > > >
> > > > -- Marcel Kinard
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Santana
> > > <cs...@gmail.com>
> > >
> >
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Andrew Grieve <ag...@chromium.org>.
Fun time to go on leave :)
Good call on putting back Plugin.java for now.
Definitely agree that we shouldn't have it for 3.0. But! We should point
out that plugins can copy & paste the file into their own package to make
old plugins "just work".
Joe - one big thing that got missed in your blog post about converting to
CordovaPlugin is that the threading model changes. That's actually the
biggest change in my mind, and plugin devs need to be aware of it. The
default used to be that all calls were made on a new background thread, the
new way is to make the calls on the WebCore thread and have plugins
delegate to background / ui threads manually.
If we're going to have more 2.x releases, I think it'd make more sense to
call them 2.10, 2.11 rather than 2.9.x. That said, I don't want to stretch
ourselves too thin by trying to maintain two very different branches.
Marcel - I like your idea of adding release notes / deprecation notices to
the docs. Perhaps this could be merged with the upgrade guides?
I've been thinking that it would be a good idea to have a Cordova blog
where committers could post to. I think an authoritative news source is
missing right now for Cordova. E.g. release announcements should go there,
what's new announcements, upgrade guides, new plugin announcements, etc.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 7:23 PM, Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2.8.1 just got pushed live. The site needs to be rebuilt still. My ruby
> dependencies are all messed up currently and are preventing me from
> rebuilding it.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Carlos Santana <csantana23@gmail.com
> >wrote:
>
> > Can we put the website (cordova.io) on Github and accept pull requests?
> >
> > I think this topic is a good one to take a closer look at our website
> being
> > the center of information that puts the wiki and docs in a single place.
> > Not saying to merge everything into one single code base or have
> > duplication but provide more rich information and pointers to docs and
> > wiki.
> >
> > Could have a "Release Notes" for the new version. Today the most
> effective
> > way to know what's new is to follow some of the Cordova guys blogs, and
> > this doesn't cover all platforms.
> >
> > We can start with a place holder now "Get ready for Cordova 3.0 !"
> >
> > My 2 cents.
> >
> > Ref:
> > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/UpdatingTheWebsite
> >
> >
> >
> > --Carlos
> >
> > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> >
> > > On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com<javascript:;>>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts, tweets,
> > > > google groups.
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
> > > >> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
> > > >>
> > > >> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
> > >
> > > Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated properly, why is
> > > there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right things,
> but
> > > for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers.
> > >
> > > If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication, here are
> > some
> > > potential ways to improve that:
> > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I think
> > > Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And Simon has a
> > blog
> > > post on this topic.
> > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that has:
> > > - pointers to other places in the docs (i.e., device.name,
> > > org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which things
> are
> > > going away. And the history of which things already have gone away.
> > > - in that detail, the version or date when they are going away,
> > > and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova
> <platformX>
> > > Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you don't break
> > when
> > > they do go away.
> > > - these would move it off the wiki into the docs, because
> perhaps
> > > consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should remain on the
> > > wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is really
> > geared
> > > to contributors/committers, not consumers.
> > > - add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in Cordova
> x.y".
> > > Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their blogs,
> but
> > > feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of making
> > more
> > > work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in the docs
> (if
> > > they are OK with that). That can include reminders of deprecation hits.
> > >
> > > Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by plugin
> > authors
> > > or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the
> > > @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something offered
> by
> > > apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of content.
> Whatever
> > > it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so consumers
> > > know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back months later
> > and
> > > look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in 2.2?).
> > >
> > > Comments?
> > >
> > > -- Marcel Kinard
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos Santana
> > <cs...@gmail.com>
> >
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>.
2.8.1 just got pushed live. The site needs to be rebuilt still. My ruby
dependencies are all messed up currently and are preventing me from
rebuilding it.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:25 AM, Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Can we put the website (cordova.io) on Github and accept pull requests?
>
> I think this topic is a good one to take a closer look at our website being
> the center of information that puts the wiki and docs in a single place.
> Not saying to merge everything into one single code base or have
> duplication but provide more rich information and pointers to docs and
> wiki.
>
> Could have a "Release Notes" for the new version. Today the most effective
> way to know what's new is to follow some of the Cordova guys blogs, and
> this doesn't cover all platforms.
>
> We can start with a place holder now "Get ready for Cordova 3.0 !"
>
> My 2 cents.
>
> Ref:
> http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/UpdatingTheWebsite
>
>
>
> --Carlos
>
> On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Marcel Kinard wrote:
>
> > On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts, tweets,
> > > google groups.
> > >
> > > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
> > >
> > >> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
> > >> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
> > >>
> > >> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
> >
> > Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated properly, why is
> > there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right things, but
> > for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers.
> >
> > If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication, here are
> some
> > potential ways to improve that:
> > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I think
> > Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And Simon has a
> blog
> > post on this topic.
> > - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that has:
> > - pointers to other places in the docs (i.e., device.name,
> > org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which things are
> > going away. And the history of which things already have gone away.
> > - in that detail, the version or date when they are going away,
> > and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova <platformX>
> > Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you don't break
> when
> > they do go away.
> > - these would move it off the wiki into the docs, because perhaps
> > consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should remain on the
> > wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is really
> geared
> > to contributors/committers, not consumers.
> > - add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in Cordova x.y".
> > Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their blogs, but
> > feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of making
> more
> > work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in the docs (if
> > they are OK with that). That can include reminders of deprecation hits.
> >
> > Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by plugin
> authors
> > or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the
> > @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something offered by
> > apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of content. Whatever
> > it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so consumers
> > know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back months later
> and
> > look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in 2.2?).
> >
> > Comments?
> >
> > -- Marcel Kinard
>
>
>
> --
> Carlos Santana
> <cs...@gmail.com>
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Carlos Santana <cs...@gmail.com>.
Can we put the website (cordova.io) on Github and accept pull requests?
I think this topic is a good one to take a closer look at our website being
the center of information that puts the wiki and docs in a single place.
Not saying to merge everything into one single code base or have
duplication but provide more rich information and pointers to docs and
wiki.
Could have a "Release Notes" for the new version. Today the most effective
way to know what's new is to follow some of the Cordova guys blogs, and
this doesn't cover all platforms.
We can start with a place holder now "Get ready for Cordova 3.0 !"
My 2 cents.
Ref:
http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/UpdatingTheWebsite
--Carlos
On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Marcel Kinard wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts, tweets,
> > google groups.
> >
> > On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
> >
> >> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
> >> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
>
> Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated properly, why is
> there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right things, but
> for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers.
>
> If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication, here are some
> potential ways to improve that:
> - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I think
> Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And Simon has a blog
> post on this topic.
> - add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that has:
> - pointers to other places in the docs (i.e., device.name,
> org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which things are
> going away. And the history of which things already have gone away.
> - in that detail, the version or date when they are going away,
> and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova <platformX>
> Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you don't break when
> they do go away.
> - these would move it off the wiki into the docs, because perhaps
> consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should remain on the
> wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is really geared
> to contributors/committers, not consumers.
> - add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in Cordova x.y".
> Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their blogs, but
> feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of making more
> work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in the docs (if
> they are OK with that). That can include reminders of deprecation hits.
>
> Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by plugin authors
> or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the
> @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something offered by
> apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of content. Whatever
> it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so consumers
> know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back months later and
> look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in 2.2?).
>
> Comments?
>
> -- Marcel Kinard
--
Carlos Santana
<cs...@gmail.com>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Marcel Kinard <cm...@gmail.com>.
On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Shazron <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts, tweets,
> google groups.
>
> On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
>
>> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
>> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
>>
>> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
Yeah, something on this tack. So if it was deprecated properly, why is there noise in the plugin ecosystem? Joe/Simon did the right things, but for whatever reason it didn't connect with the consumers.
If we think this is just a matter of consumer communication, here are some potential ways to improve that:
- add to cordova-docs a top-level "Upgrading Plugins Guide". I think Michael Billau had started one and might have a draft. And Simon has a blog post on this topic.
- add to cordova-docs a top-level "Deprecation Index" that has:
- pointers to other places in the docs (i.e., device.name, org.apache.cordova.api.Plugin) where there is detail on which things are going away. And the history of which things already have gone away.
- in that detail, the version or date when they are going away, and link to the Upgrading Plugins Guide or Upgrading Cordova <platformX> Guide or some other reference that says what to do so you don't break when they do go away.
- these would move it off the wiki into the docs, because perhaps consumers don't monitor the wiki. Perhaps all that should remain on the wiki is the policy definition. It does seem that the wiki is really geared to contributors/committers, not consumers.
- add to cordova-docs a top-level summary of "What's New in Cordova x.y". Shaz and Joe (and Simon) do a great job posting that on their blogs, but feels like there ought to be something in the docs. In lieu of making more work, just copy-paste their text into an md file for that in the docs (if they are OK with that). That can include reminders of deprecation hits.
Is there an "official" news feed that could be monitored by plugin authors or other Cordova consumers for changes like this? I found the @apachecordova Twitter account. But perhaps there is something offered by apache-infra or elsewhere better suited to that kind of content. Whatever it is, including a top-level pointer to it in cordova-docs so consumers know they should be monitoring it. And so they can go back months later and look at the history easily (i.e., why did my plugin break in 2.2?).
Comments?
-- Marcel Kinard
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>.
Whatever we decide can we be extra loud about it? Blog posts, tweets,
google groups.
On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, Joe Bowser wrote:
> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
>
> I think we should put it back for 2.x and remove it from 3.x. We also
> shouldn't support any bugs that appear with old plugins adding this.
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:15 AM, Braden Shepherdson <braden@chromium.org<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> > I think three releases sounds fine. My main point here is that we should
> > make that decision now, and announce the deprecation plan alongside 3.0,
> so
> > users know the situation.
> >
> > Announcing both soon also sounds like a good idea, but we want to make
> sure
> > any announcement of 3.0 is accompanied by our deprecation plan for 2.x.
> >
> > Braden
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Braden Shepherdson <
> braden@chromium.org <javascript:;>>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I'm indifferent about adding this back.
> >> >
> >> > What I do want to comment on is that this seems like a good precursor
> of
> >> > the furor that 3.0 is likely to create. Lots of things are going to
> >> change,
> >> > and all of these old plugins are going to be in a questionable state.
> In
> >> > principle there's no reason why you can't manually install them in a
> >> > 3.0-era project, I suppose.
> >>
> >> The old plugins are already in a questionable state. We don't maintain
> >> these plugins. The problem that we have now is that there are
> >> projects that depend on these plugins, and people haven't been
> >> updating the plugins. I know for a fact that not even PhoneGap Build
> >> has updated their Facebook Connect plugin.
> >>
> >> Also, I do have concerns about the publicity that 3.0 isn't getting so
> >> far. We need to actually announce to our users that we're making a
> >> massive change to Cordova.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > But it's going to be very confusing, and I suspect people are going
> to be
> >> > trying to use the CLI tools to install old plugins, and manually
> >> installing
> >> > new plugins. Or just not updating, because it would require more than
> a
> >> > small bit of work to migrate their apps. How firm are we going to be
> when
> >> > our users cry out for a 2.10, for long-term support for 2.x? It might
> be
> >> to
> >> > our advantage to promise a couple of bugfix releases on 2.x up front
> when
> >> > announcing 3.0. That sets the expectations: you have plenty of
> warning,
> >> and
> >> > time to make the change, but it's not going to last forever; the
> decision
> >> > for when to drop support is already made.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I think we should do a three release deprecation of 2.x, as in by the
> >> time that 3.2 rolls out, we stop supporting 2.x altogether. People
> >> will continue to use 2.x, but we won't support it.
> >>
> >> > We don't want to find ourselves juggling both branches six months from
> >> now,
> >> > let alone a year from now.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Fair enough! Based on what happened last year, I think 3.2.0 will
> >> come out in the fall, therefore we're not going to be stuck with the
> >> old version for very long. What do other people think? Should we
> >> just not maintain 2.x at all? Who can we blame for this, because I'm
> >> getting tired of being the Batman of this project.
> >>
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>.
I think that 2.9.x is going to be our long-lived 2.x stream. So,
whatever we dump in this release will be with us for as long as we
want to support that release.
BTW: I have a 2.8.1 tagged and ready to go, but the git servers are down. :(
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Simon MacDonald
<si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with you here Joe. We should put it back in 2.x stream and then
> kill it with fire for 3.x. For people who want to keep using the old style
> plugins then they can stick with the 2.x stream. Speaking of, are we going
> to have a long lived 2.x stream where we only port critical bug fixes?
>
>
> Simon Mac Donald
> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
>> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
>>
>> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
>>
>> I think we should put it back for 2.x and remove it from 3.x. We also
>> shouldn't support any bugs that appear with old plugins adding this.
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:15 AM, Braden Shepherdson <br...@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>> > I think three releases sounds fine. My main point here is that we should
>> > make that decision now, and announce the deprecation plan alongside 3.0,
>> so
>> > users know the situation.
>> >
>> > Announcing both soon also sounds like a good idea, but we want to make
>> sure
>> > any announcement of 3.0 is accompanied by our deprecation plan for 2.x.
>> >
>> > Braden
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Braden Shepherdson <
>> braden@chromium.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > I'm indifferent about adding this back.
>> >> >
>> >> > What I do want to comment on is that this seems like a good precursor
>> of
>> >> > the furor that 3.0 is likely to create. Lots of things are going to
>> >> change,
>> >> > and all of these old plugins are going to be in a questionable state.
>> In
>> >> > principle there's no reason why you can't manually install them in a
>> >> > 3.0-era project, I suppose.
>> >>
>> >> The old plugins are already in a questionable state. We don't maintain
>> >> these plugins. The problem that we have now is that there are
>> >> projects that depend on these plugins, and people haven't been
>> >> updating the plugins. I know for a fact that not even PhoneGap Build
>> >> has updated their Facebook Connect plugin.
>> >>
>> >> Also, I do have concerns about the publicity that 3.0 isn't getting so
>> >> far. We need to actually announce to our users that we're making a
>> >> massive change to Cordova.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > But it's going to be very confusing, and I suspect people are going
>> to be
>> >> > trying to use the CLI tools to install old plugins, and manually
>> >> installing
>> >> > new plugins. Or just not updating, because it would require more than
>> a
>> >> > small bit of work to migrate their apps. How firm are we going to be
>> when
>> >> > our users cry out for a 2.10, for long-term support for 2.x? It might
>> be
>> >> to
>> >> > our advantage to promise a couple of bugfix releases on 2.x up front
>> when
>> >> > announcing 3.0. That sets the expectations: you have plenty of
>> warning,
>> >> and
>> >> > time to make the change, but it's not going to last forever; the
>> decision
>> >> > for when to drop support is already made.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I think we should do a three release deprecation of 2.x, as in by the
>> >> time that 3.2 rolls out, we stop supporting 2.x altogether. People
>> >> will continue to use 2.x, but we won't support it.
>> >>
>> >> > We don't want to find ourselves juggling both branches six months from
>> >> now,
>> >> > let alone a year from now.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Fair enough! Based on what happened last year, I think 3.2.0 will
>> >> come out in the fall, therefore we're not going to be stuck with the
>> >> old version for very long. What do other people think? Should we
>> >> just not maintain 2.x at all? Who can we blame for this, because I'm
>> >> getting tired of being the Batman of this project.
>> >>
>>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>.
I agree with you here Joe. We should put it back in 2.x stream and then
kill it with fire for 3.x. For people who want to keep using the old style
plugins then they can stick with the 2.x stream. Speaking of, are we going
to have a long lived 2.x stream where we only port critical bug fixes?
Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
> missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
>
> https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
>
> I think we should put it back for 2.x and remove it from 3.x. We also
> shouldn't support any bugs that appear with old plugins adding this.
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:15 AM, Braden Shepherdson <br...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> > I think three releases sounds fine. My main point here is that we should
> > make that decision now, and announce the deprecation plan alongside 3.0,
> so
> > users know the situation.
> >
> > Announcing both soon also sounds like a good idea, but we want to make
> sure
> > any announcement of 3.0 is accompanied by our deprecation plan for 2.x.
> >
> > Braden
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Braden Shepherdson <
> braden@chromium.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > I'm indifferent about adding this back.
> >> >
> >> > What I do want to comment on is that this seems like a good precursor
> of
> >> > the furor that 3.0 is likely to create. Lots of things are going to
> >> change,
> >> > and all of these old plugins are going to be in a questionable state.
> In
> >> > principle there's no reason why you can't manually install them in a
> >> > 3.0-era project, I suppose.
> >>
> >> The old plugins are already in a questionable state. We don't maintain
> >> these plugins. The problem that we have now is that there are
> >> projects that depend on these plugins, and people haven't been
> >> updating the plugins. I know for a fact that not even PhoneGap Build
> >> has updated their Facebook Connect plugin.
> >>
> >> Also, I do have concerns about the publicity that 3.0 isn't getting so
> >> far. We need to actually announce to our users that we're making a
> >> massive change to Cordova.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > But it's going to be very confusing, and I suspect people are going
> to be
> >> > trying to use the CLI tools to install old plugins, and manually
> >> installing
> >> > new plugins. Or just not updating, because it would require more than
> a
> >> > small bit of work to migrate their apps. How firm are we going to be
> when
> >> > our users cry out for a 2.10, for long-term support for 2.x? It might
> be
> >> to
> >> > our advantage to promise a couple of bugfix releases on 2.x up front
> when
> >> > announcing 3.0. That sets the expectations: you have plenty of
> warning,
> >> and
> >> > time to make the change, but it's not going to last forever; the
> decision
> >> > for when to drop support is already made.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I think we should do a three release deprecation of 2.x, as in by the
> >> time that 3.2 rolls out, we stop supporting 2.x altogether. People
> >> will continue to use 2.x, but we won't support it.
> >>
> >> > We don't want to find ourselves juggling both branches six months from
> >> now,
> >> > let alone a year from now.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Fair enough! Based on what happened last year, I think 3.2.0 will
> >> come out in the fall, therefore we're not going to be stuck with the
> >> old version for very long. What do other people think? Should we
> >> just not maintain 2.x at all? Who can we blame for this, because I'm
> >> getting tired of being the Batman of this project.
> >>
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>.
OK, We actually did deprecate this properly. I don't know how I
missed this edit Simon did on the Wiki:
https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/DeprecationPolicy
I think we should put it back for 2.x and remove it from 3.x. We also
shouldn't support any bugs that appear with old plugins adding this.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 7:15 AM, Braden Shepherdson <br...@chromium.org> wrote:
> I think three releases sounds fine. My main point here is that we should
> make that decision now, and announce the deprecation plan alongside 3.0, so
> users know the situation.
>
> Announcing both soon also sounds like a good idea, but we want to make sure
> any announcement of 3.0 is accompanied by our deprecation plan for 2.x.
>
> Braden
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Braden Shepherdson <br...@chromium.org>
>> wrote:
>> > I'm indifferent about adding this back.
>> >
>> > What I do want to comment on is that this seems like a good precursor of
>> > the furor that 3.0 is likely to create. Lots of things are going to
>> change,
>> > and all of these old plugins are going to be in a questionable state. In
>> > principle there's no reason why you can't manually install them in a
>> > 3.0-era project, I suppose.
>>
>> The old plugins are already in a questionable state. We don't maintain
>> these plugins. The problem that we have now is that there are
>> projects that depend on these plugins, and people haven't been
>> updating the plugins. I know for a fact that not even PhoneGap Build
>> has updated their Facebook Connect plugin.
>>
>> Also, I do have concerns about the publicity that 3.0 isn't getting so
>> far. We need to actually announce to our users that we're making a
>> massive change to Cordova.
>>
>> >
>> > But it's going to be very confusing, and I suspect people are going to be
>> > trying to use the CLI tools to install old plugins, and manually
>> installing
>> > new plugins. Or just not updating, because it would require more than a
>> > small bit of work to migrate their apps. How firm are we going to be when
>> > our users cry out for a 2.10, for long-term support for 2.x? It might be
>> to
>> > our advantage to promise a couple of bugfix releases on 2.x up front when
>> > announcing 3.0. That sets the expectations: you have plenty of warning,
>> and
>> > time to make the change, but it's not going to last forever; the decision
>> > for when to drop support is already made.
>> >
>>
>> I think we should do a three release deprecation of 2.x, as in by the
>> time that 3.2 rolls out, we stop supporting 2.x altogether. People
>> will continue to use 2.x, but we won't support it.
>>
>> > We don't want to find ourselves juggling both branches six months from
>> now,
>> > let alone a year from now.
>> >
>>
>> Fair enough! Based on what happened last year, I think 3.2.0 will
>> come out in the fall, therefore we're not going to be stuck with the
>> old version for very long. What do other people think? Should we
>> just not maintain 2.x at all? Who can we blame for this, because I'm
>> getting tired of being the Batman of this project.
>>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Braden Shepherdson <br...@chromium.org>.
I think three releases sounds fine. My main point here is that we should
make that decision now, and announce the deprecation plan alongside 3.0, so
users know the situation.
Announcing both soon also sounds like a good idea, but we want to make sure
any announcement of 3.0 is accompanied by our deprecation plan for 2.x.
Braden
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Braden Shepherdson <br...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> > I'm indifferent about adding this back.
> >
> > What I do want to comment on is that this seems like a good precursor of
> > the furor that 3.0 is likely to create. Lots of things are going to
> change,
> > and all of these old plugins are going to be in a questionable state. In
> > principle there's no reason why you can't manually install them in a
> > 3.0-era project, I suppose.
>
> The old plugins are already in a questionable state. We don't maintain
> these plugins. The problem that we have now is that there are
> projects that depend on these plugins, and people haven't been
> updating the plugins. I know for a fact that not even PhoneGap Build
> has updated their Facebook Connect plugin.
>
> Also, I do have concerns about the publicity that 3.0 isn't getting so
> far. We need to actually announce to our users that we're making a
> massive change to Cordova.
>
> >
> > But it's going to be very confusing, and I suspect people are going to be
> > trying to use the CLI tools to install old plugins, and manually
> installing
> > new plugins. Or just not updating, because it would require more than a
> > small bit of work to migrate their apps. How firm are we going to be when
> > our users cry out for a 2.10, for long-term support for 2.x? It might be
> to
> > our advantage to promise a couple of bugfix releases on 2.x up front when
> > announcing 3.0. That sets the expectations: you have plenty of warning,
> and
> > time to make the change, but it's not going to last forever; the decision
> > for when to drop support is already made.
> >
>
> I think we should do a three release deprecation of 2.x, as in by the
> time that 3.2 rolls out, we stop supporting 2.x altogether. People
> will continue to use 2.x, but we won't support it.
>
> > We don't want to find ourselves juggling both branches six months from
> now,
> > let alone a year from now.
> >
>
> Fair enough! Based on what happened last year, I think 3.2.0 will
> come out in the fall, therefore we're not going to be stuck with the
> old version for very long. What do other people think? Should we
> just not maintain 2.x at all? Who can we blame for this, because I'm
> getting tired of being the Batman of this project.
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Braden Shepherdson <br...@chromium.org> wrote:
> I'm indifferent about adding this back.
>
> What I do want to comment on is that this seems like a good precursor of
> the furor that 3.0 is likely to create. Lots of things are going to change,
> and all of these old plugins are going to be in a questionable state. In
> principle there's no reason why you can't manually install them in a
> 3.0-era project, I suppose.
The old plugins are already in a questionable state. We don't maintain
these plugins. The problem that we have now is that there are
projects that depend on these plugins, and people haven't been
updating the plugins. I know for a fact that not even PhoneGap Build
has updated their Facebook Connect plugin.
Also, I do have concerns about the publicity that 3.0 isn't getting so
far. We need to actually announce to our users that we're making a
massive change to Cordova.
>
> But it's going to be very confusing, and I suspect people are going to be
> trying to use the CLI tools to install old plugins, and manually installing
> new plugins. Or just not updating, because it would require more than a
> small bit of work to migrate their apps. How firm are we going to be when
> our users cry out for a 2.10, for long-term support for 2.x? It might be to
> our advantage to promise a couple of bugfix releases on 2.x up front when
> announcing 3.0. That sets the expectations: you have plenty of warning, and
> time to make the change, but it's not going to last forever; the decision
> for when to drop support is already made.
>
I think we should do a three release deprecation of 2.x, as in by the
time that 3.2 rolls out, we stop supporting 2.x altogether. People
will continue to use 2.x, but we won't support it.
> We don't want to find ourselves juggling both branches six months from now,
> let alone a year from now.
>
Fair enough! Based on what happened last year, I think 3.2.0 will
come out in the fall, therefore we're not going to be stuck with the
old version for very long. What do other people think? Should we
just not maintain 2.x at all? Who can we blame for this, because I'm
getting tired of being the Batman of this project.
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Braden Shepherdson <br...@chromium.org>.
I'm indifferent about adding this back.
What I do want to comment on is that this seems like a good precursor of
the furor that 3.0 is likely to create. Lots of things are going to change,
and all of these old plugins are going to be in a questionable state. In
principle there's no reason why you can't manually install them in a
3.0-era project, I suppose.
But it's going to be very confusing, and I suspect people are going to be
trying to use the CLI tools to install old plugins, and manually installing
new plugins. Or just not updating, because it would require more than a
small bit of work to migrate their apps. How firm are we going to be when
our users cry out for a 2.10, for long-term support for 2.x? It might be to
our advantage to promise a couple of bugfix releases on 2.x up front when
announcing 3.0. That sets the expectations: you have plenty of warning, and
time to make the change, but it's not going to last forever; the decision
for when to drop support is already made.
We don't want to find ourselves juggling both branches six months from now,
let alone a year from now.
Braden
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Lucas Holmquist <lh...@redhat.com>wrote:
> This is sort of a tough one i think, how long has this deprecation notice
> been in the code?
>
> if we change android to work, and then remove it again, will we still
> have the same issue with the users.
>
>
> i'm just trying to play devil's advocate here. As a user, it would be nice
> to have this come back for a release, but as a developer, i can see the
> other hand
>
>
> On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sounds good, as long as we set it to deprecate after 3.0. I can get
> > it done tomorrow.
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> >> Might not be a bad idea, I'm sure users would appreciate it. Is it
> >> acceptable for us to do an android-only 2.8.1 ?
> >>
> >> On 6/10/13 10:41 PM, "Steven Gill" <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> 2.8.1?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> This just affects Android.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
> >>>> <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Can someone post a link to a commit, or a ticket for this? I am
> having
> >>>>> trouble understanding the scope, as is.
> >>>>> Does this just affect Android?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>> Jesse
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Jun 10, 2013, at 8:26 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> OK, if we bring it back, how long should we bring it back for? We
> >>>>> can't keep it around forever. The only reason that I want to bring
> it
> >>>>> back is because I feel that it was unfair to the users to have this
> >>>>> deprecated without it even being listed on the Deprecation article on
> >>>>> our wiki, let alone announced. Unlike something like WebSQL vs
> >>>>> WebStorage, where we're forced to make a crap choice, this is
> >>>>> something that we have full control over.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams
> >>>>> <to...@devgeeks.org> wrote:
> >>>>>> The plugin ecosystem is in a bit of an uproar about it :(
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If it's not a massive pain, it could really help.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 11/06/2013, at 12:57 PM, Simon MacDonald
> >>>> <si...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
> >>>>>>> answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
> >>>>>>> update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is
> the
> >>>>>>> users are not ready for this change.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
> >>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hey
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
> >>>>>>>> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the
> >>>> deprecation
> >>>>>>>> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
> >>>>>>>> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
> >>>>>>>> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin
> shim
> >>>>>>>> back into Cordova.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users
> >>>> the
> >>>>>>>> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at
> >>>> all.
> >>>>>>>> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Joe
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
>
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 5:18 AM, Lucas Holmquist <lh...@redhat.com> wrote:
> This is sort of a tough one i think, how long has this deprecation notice been in the code?
Does it matter if the deprecation is in code? Our users don't read
code, which is painfully obvious. The fact is that this was
deprecated in code for six months, but we didn't announce the change,
and very few people have updated their plugins.
> if we change android to work, and then remove it again, will we still have the same issue with the users.
I hope not, but if we do I don't care at that point. We gave them
notice. If they get upset about this change at that point, it's their
own fault.
>
> i'm just trying to play devil's advocate here. As a user, it would be nice to have this come back for a release, but as a developer, i can see the other hand
>
Fair enough. I'm not known as the champion of the users, actually
quite to the contrary. I'm the developer that all our Android users
despise because I close bugs that I feel are out of scope, or that we
just can't fix. Therefore, when I say that we should probably fix
things, it's probably an actual real issue and doesn't come from any
warm fuzzy feeling I have for these people.
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Lucas Holmquist <lh...@redhat.com>.
This is sort of a tough one i think, how long has this deprecation notice been in the code?
if we change android to work, and then remove it again, will we still have the same issue with the users.
i'm just trying to play devil's advocate here. As a user, it would be nice to have this come back for a release, but as a developer, i can see the other hand
On Jun 11, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sounds good, as long as we set it to deprecate after 3.0. I can get
> it done tomorrow.
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> Might not be a bad idea, I'm sure users would appreciate it. Is it
>> acceptable for us to do an android-only 2.8.1 ?
>>
>> On 6/10/13 10:41 PM, "Steven Gill" <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 2.8.1?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This just affects Android.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>>> <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Can someone post a link to a commit, or a ticket for this? I am having
>>>>> trouble understanding the scope, as is.
>>>>> Does this just affect Android?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Jesse
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone5
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 10, 2013, at 8:26 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> OK, if we bring it back, how long should we bring it back for? We
>>>>> can't keep it around forever. The only reason that I want to bring it
>>>>> back is because I feel that it was unfair to the users to have this
>>>>> deprecated without it even being listed on the Deprecation article on
>>>>> our wiki, let alone announced. Unlike something like WebSQL vs
>>>>> WebStorage, where we're forced to make a crap choice, this is
>>>>> something that we have full control over.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams
>>>>> <to...@devgeeks.org> wrote:
>>>>>> The plugin ecosystem is in a bit of an uproar about it :(
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If it's not a massive pain, it could really help.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/06/2013, at 12:57 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>>> <si...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
>>>>>>> answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
>>>>>>> update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is the
>>>>>>> users are not ready for this change.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>>>>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hey
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
>>>>>>>> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the
>>>> deprecation
>>>>>>>> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
>>>>>>>> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
>>>>>>>> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
>>>>>>>> back into Cordova.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at
>>>> all.
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>.
Sounds good, as long as we set it to deprecate after 3.0. I can get
it done tomorrow.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Might not be a bad idea, I'm sure users would appreciate it. Is it
> acceptable for us to do an android-only 2.8.1 ?
>
> On 6/10/13 10:41 PM, "Steven Gill" <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>2.8.1?
>>
>>
>>On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This just affects Android.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
>>> <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Can someone post a link to a commit, or a ticket for this? I am having
>>> > trouble understanding the scope, as is.
>>> > Does this just affect Android?
>>> >
>>> > Cheers,
>>> > Jesse
>>> >
>>> > Sent from my iPhone5
>>> >
>>> > On Jun 10, 2013, at 8:26 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > OK, if we bring it back, how long should we bring it back for? We
>>> > can't keep it around forever. The only reason that I want to bring it
>>> > back is because I feel that it was unfair to the users to have this
>>> > deprecated without it even being listed on the Deprecation article on
>>> > our wiki, let alone announced. Unlike something like WebSQL vs
>>> > WebStorage, where we're forced to make a crap choice, this is
>>> > something that we have full control over.
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams
>>> > <to...@devgeeks.org> wrote:
>>> >> The plugin ecosystem is in a bit of an uproar about it :(
>>> >>
>>> >> If it's not a massive pain, it could really help.
>>> >>
>>> >>> On 11/06/2013, at 12:57 PM, Simon MacDonald
>>><si...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
>>> >>> answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
>>> >>> update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is the
>>> >>> users are not ready for this change.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> >>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>>> Hey
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
>>> >>>> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the
>>>deprecation
>>> >>>> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
>>> >>>> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
>>> >>>> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
>>> >>>> back into Cordova.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users
>>>the
>>> >>>> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at
>>>all.
>>> >>>> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Joe
>>> >>
>>>
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Filip Maj <fi...@adobe.com>.
Might not be a bad idea, I'm sure users would appreciate it. Is it
acceptable for us to do an android-only 2.8.1 ?
On 6/10/13 10:41 PM, "Steven Gill" <st...@gmail.com> wrote:
>2.8.1?
>
>
>On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This just affects Android.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
>> <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Can someone post a link to a commit, or a ticket for this? I am having
>> > trouble understanding the scope, as is.
>> > Does this just affect Android?
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Jesse
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone5
>> >
>> > On Jun 10, 2013, at 8:26 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > OK, if we bring it back, how long should we bring it back for? We
>> > can't keep it around forever. The only reason that I want to bring it
>> > back is because I feel that it was unfair to the users to have this
>> > deprecated without it even being listed on the Deprecation article on
>> > our wiki, let alone announced. Unlike something like WebSQL vs
>> > WebStorage, where we're forced to make a crap choice, this is
>> > something that we have full control over.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams
>> > <to...@devgeeks.org> wrote:
>> >> The plugin ecosystem is in a bit of an uproar about it :(
>> >>
>> >> If it's not a massive pain, it could really help.
>> >>
>> >>> On 11/06/2013, at 12:57 PM, Simon MacDonald
>><si...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
>> >>> answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
>> >>> update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is the
>> >>> users are not ready for this change.
>> >>>
>> >>> Simon Mac Donald
>> >>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>> Hey
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
>> >>>> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the
>>deprecation
>> >>>> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
>> >>>> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
>> >>>> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
>> >>>> back into Cordova.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users
>>the
>> >>>> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at
>>all.
>> >>>> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Joe
>> >>
>>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Steven Gill <st...@gmail.com>.
2.8.1?
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:13 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This just affects Android.
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
> <pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Can someone post a link to a commit, or a ticket for this? I am having
> > trouble understanding the scope, as is.
> > Does this just affect Android?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Jesse
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone5
> >
> > On Jun 10, 2013, at 8:26 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > OK, if we bring it back, how long should we bring it back for? We
> > can't keep it around forever. The only reason that I want to bring it
> > back is because I feel that it was unfair to the users to have this
> > deprecated without it even being listed on the Deprecation article on
> > our wiki, let alone announced. Unlike something like WebSQL vs
> > WebStorage, where we're forced to make a crap choice, this is
> > something that we have full control over.
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams
> > <to...@devgeeks.org> wrote:
> >> The plugin ecosystem is in a bit of an uproar about it :(
> >>
> >> If it's not a massive pain, it could really help.
> >>
> >>> On 11/06/2013, at 12:57 PM, Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
> >>> answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
> >>> update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is the
> >>> users are not ready for this change.
> >>>
> >>> Simon Mac Donald
> >>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> Hey
> >>>>
> >>>> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
> >>>> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the deprecation
> >>>> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
> >>>> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
> >>>> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
> >>>> back into Cordova.
> >>>>
> >>>> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users the
> >>>> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at all.
> >>>> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
> >>>>
> >>>> Joe
> >>
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>.
This just affects Android.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Jesse MacFadyen
<pu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can someone post a link to a commit, or a ticket for this? I am having
> trouble understanding the scope, as is.
> Does this just affect Android?
>
> Cheers,
> Jesse
>
> Sent from my iPhone5
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 8:26 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> OK, if we bring it back, how long should we bring it back for? We
> can't keep it around forever. The only reason that I want to bring it
> back is because I feel that it was unfair to the users to have this
> deprecated without it even being listed on the Deprecation article on
> our wiki, let alone announced. Unlike something like WebSQL vs
> WebStorage, where we're forced to make a crap choice, this is
> something that we have full control over.
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams
> <to...@devgeeks.org> wrote:
>> The plugin ecosystem is in a bit of an uproar about it :(
>>
>> If it's not a massive pain, it could really help.
>>
>>> On 11/06/2013, at 12:57 PM, Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
>>> answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
>>> update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is the
>>> users are not ready for this change.
>>>
>>> Simon Mac Donald
>>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hey
>>>>
>>>> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
>>>> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the deprecation
>>>> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
>>>> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
>>>> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
>>>> back into Cordova.
>>>>
>>>> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users the
>>>> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at all.
>>>> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
>>>>
>>>> Joe
>>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Jesse MacFadyen <pu...@gmail.com>.
Can someone post a link to a commit, or a ticket for this? I am having
trouble understanding the scope, as is.
Does this just affect Android?
Cheers,
Jesse
Sent from my iPhone5
On Jun 10, 2013, at 8:26 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, if we bring it back, how long should we bring it back for? We
can't keep it around forever. The only reason that I want to bring it
back is because I feel that it was unfair to the users to have this
deprecated without it even being listed on the Deprecation article on
our wiki, let alone announced. Unlike something like WebSQL vs
WebStorage, where we're forced to make a crap choice, this is
something that we have full control over.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams
<to...@devgeeks.org> wrote:
> The plugin ecosystem is in a bit of an uproar about it :(
>
> If it's not a massive pain, it could really help.
>
>> On 11/06/2013, at 12:57 PM, Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
>> answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
>> update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is the
>> users are not ready for this change.
>>
>> Simon Mac Donald
>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hey
>>>
>>> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
>>> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the deprecation
>>> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
>>> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
>>> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
>>> back into Cordova.
>>>
>>> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users the
>>> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at all.
>>> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
>>>
>>> Joe
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com>.
OK, if we bring it back, how long should we bring it back for? We
can't keep it around forever. The only reason that I want to bring it
back is because I feel that it was unfair to the users to have this
deprecated without it even being listed on the Deprecation article on
our wiki, let alone announced. Unlike something like WebSQL vs
WebStorage, where we're forced to make a crap choice, this is
something that we have full control over.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams
<to...@devgeeks.org> wrote:
> The plugin ecosystem is in a bit of an uproar about it :(
>
> If it's not a massive pain, it could really help.
>
> On 11/06/2013, at 12:57 PM, Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
>> answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
>> update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is the
>> users are not ready for this change.
>>
>> Simon Mac Donald
>> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hey
>>>
>>> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
>>> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the deprecation
>>> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
>>> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
>>> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
>>> back into Cordova.
>>>
>>> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users the
>>> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at all.
>>> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
>>>
>>> Joe
>
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Tommy-Carlos Williams <to...@devgeeks.org>.
The plugin ecosystem is in a bit of an uproar about it :(
If it's not a massive pain, it could really help.
On 11/06/2013, at 12:57 PM, Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
> answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
> update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is the
> users are not ready for this change.
>
> Simon Mac Donald
> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey
>>
>> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
>> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the deprecation
>> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
>> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
>> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
>> back into Cordova.
>>
>> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users the
>> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at all.
>> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
>>
>> Joe
Re: Plugin and CordovaPlugin
Posted by Simon MacDonald <si...@gmail.com>.
I think the right thing to do is to put it back in for now. I'm
answering tons of questions on this and people are begging me to
update plugins I didn't even write. So the empirical evidence is the
users are not ready for this change.
Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey
>
> I know that we have recently deprecated Plugin in favour for
> CordovaPlugin, but it seems that we really screwed up the deprecation
> and now one of the flagship apps that use PhoneGap no longer has a
> valid upgrade path. I think that this is a major problem that is
> biting us in the ass, so I would like to see us put the Plugin shim
> back into Cordova.
>
> I know this is a bad thing to add, but we basically gave our users the
> giant middle finger by deprecating this without notifying them at all.
> I'm not sure what we should do in this case.
>
> Joe