Concerns about releasing 1.5

[Becky Gibson <gi...@gmail.com>]

I have serious concerns about releasing 1.5 with only partial
implementation of the unified JS code.   This release will be nearly
unusable for people who develop for more than one platform.  First,  we are
breaking their existing code will all of the renaming.   I understand that
is inevitable.  People will grumble but it had do be done in order to move
forward within Apache.

But, in addition to the rename we are modifying the apis on SOME platforms.
 API changes can be subtle and painful to fix.  Do we have them all well
documented?  In addition to finding and making the api changes, folks who
develop for more than one platform will have to have divergent code for the
different platforms.  Only to have to change it again, for 1.6 when the
unified JS is completed.   That doesn't seem right and a cruel thing to do
to our loyal community.   Why not wait until the unified JS is complete and
at least keep all of the changes within one release?   What is the rush to
get out a 1.5? Is there any real harm in putting it off? Are the bug fixes
that MUST get in?   Just my humble opinion that we should hold off on 1.5
until the unified JS is more fully baked.  As an FYI - iOS is going to take
me awhile (re: "API changes can be subtle and painful to fix").

-becky

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

[Paul Beusterien <pa...@gmail.com>]

>
> Don't disagree its going to break things. What would be best way to
> let the users know? Shipping early and fixing before 2.x seems
> pragmatic to me. (Would prefer a rock solid major release and unstable
> point release.)


My expectation is the opposite of what Brian states above.

I would expect API disruptions to occur in major releases. My expectation
about minor releases is they consist of bug fixes and minor non-disruptive
enhancements.

I'd much rather see the 2.0 API breaking changes in a separate stream.  It
could be something like 2.0beta1. Or Cordova could take the opposite
odd/even approach of node and make 2.x a development/testing stream and 3.x
being the stable next release.

Dumping a pre-release on an unsuspecting full PhoneGap community will be
damaging. It would be much better to clearly identify the next generation
stuff so that early adopters can knowingly adopt it with the right
expectations about quality level.

Paul

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

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

My own personal thoughts on the matter is when you have a public API like
we have with Cordova each release should be as good as the previous
release. That is, all existing features should continue to work. So things
where we are breaking all the plugins or changing the location of the root
file system don't sit well with me. I believe those are decisions that
should be discussed with the community and planned for a release instead of
just appearing in the next release.

Also, get off my lawn.

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


On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:

> > Are odd-numbered point releases advertised as unstable? Should they be?
>
> this is how nodejs and other unix-y projects do things
>
>
> > What is the downside to cutting a release with only congruent
> improvements
> > and bug-fixes?
>
> we've made no commitment on the plugin api (its never been official)
> so I don't feel we're breaking any promises
>
>
> > Personally I am also curious about why the changes are considered for
> > general(?) release in a staggered fashion.
>
> you can get a sense of the roadmap here
> http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/RoadmapProjects
>
> the general consensus is that this year we remove everything from
> phonegap api wise, plugin all the things, and then have officially
> supported plugins in addition to community ones. this work is a part
> of that effort. not pretty, but worthwhile in the long run.
>
> with conditional compilation of plugins anyone can compose a version
> of cordova suited to their project goals. plus, things should be
> lighter and more performant, in addition to having a better security
> story.
>
> (though w/ an avg hello world weighing in at 20kb and a bridge that
> gets 200 operations/second I've not seen a convincing argument
> otherwise)
>

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

[Joe Developer <jo...@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 12:42 AM, Ray Camden <ra...@adobe.com> wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: brian.leroux@gmail.com [mailto:brian.leroux@gmail.com] On Behalf
> > Of Brian LeRoux
> > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 8:23 PM
> > To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5
> >
> > > Are odd-numbered point releases advertised as unstable? Should they be?
> >
> > this is how nodejs and other unix-y projects do things
>
> Just an FYI, this is the first I've heard of this myself. Just trying to
> provide some context to how the public may react.
>

Using odd-numbered as unstable isn't unusual, but normally it is fairly
well advertised as such - it is also generally tends to indicate a branched
release process where Stable still receives bug-fixes and non-api breaking
enhancements, while unstable is for building out breaking changes or
architectural changes with significant side-effects.

>From looking at http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/RoadmapProjects and skimming
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB it seems that the release process
is more time-bound than 'intended feature bound' - for that to have the
best results I would imagine that there should be a careful selection of
which commits are included ( ready ) for a given release deadline.

My naive thought would be that an important selling point for actually
using phone-gap is exactly to be able to target multiple platforms with the
same core codebase, breaking that expectation ( as I assume would happen in
terms of Android vs other ) should, imo, be made in a branch that is
clearly identified as WiP in terms of functionality offered. That isn't to
say that it shouldn't be released, I would imagine that the improvements
will be well-received by end-developers that target Android exclusively.



> -ray
>
>

RE: Concerns about releasing 1.5

[Ray Camden <ra...@adobe.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: brian.leroux@gmail.com [mailto:brian.leroux@gmail.com] On Behalf
> Of Brian LeRoux
> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 8:23 PM
> To: callback-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5
> 
> > Are odd-numbered point releases advertised as unstable? Should they be?
> 
> this is how nodejs and other unix-y projects do things

Just an FYI, this is the first I've heard of this myself. Just trying to provide some context to how the public may react. 

-ray

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

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

> Are odd-numbered point releases advertised as unstable? Should they be?

this is how nodejs and other unix-y projects do things


> What is the downside to cutting a release with only congruent improvements
> and bug-fixes?

we've made no commitment on the plugin api (its never been official)
so I don't feel we're breaking any promises


> Personally I am also curious about why the changes are considered for
> general(?) release in a staggered fashion.

you can get a sense of the roadmap here
http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/RoadmapProjects

the general consensus is that this year we remove everything from
phonegap api wise, plugin all the things, and then have officially
supported plugins in addition to community ones. this work is a part
of that effort. not pretty, but worthwhile in the long run.

with conditional compilation of plugins anyone can compose a version
of cordova suited to their project goals. plus, things should be
lighter and more performant, in addition to having a better security
story.

(though w/ an avg hello world weighing in at 20kb and a bridge that
gets 200 operations/second I've not seen a convincing argument
otherwise)

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

[Joe Developer <jo...@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:

> > My issue is that by releasing unified-js over different releases we are
> > making it much harder on our users!  IMHO we haven't adequately warned
> > users about all the upcoming changes.
>
> Don't disagree its going to break things. What would be best way to
> let the users know? Shipping early and fixing before 2.x seems
> pragmatic to me. (Would prefer a rock solid major release and unstable
> point release.)
>

Are odd-numbered point releases advertised as unstable? Should they be?

What is the downside to cutting a release with only congruent improvements
and bug-fixes?


>
> > I'll get off my soapbox now, but I do believe we should be catering to
> our
> > users a bit more.
>
> Agree --- you think its worthwhile if I prep a big ol' blog post
> warning them of the changes, why we're making them?
>

Personally I am also curious about why the changes are considered for
general(?) release in a staggered fashion.

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

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

> My issue is that by releasing unified-js over different releases we are
> making it much harder on our users!  IMHO we haven't adequately warned
> users about all the upcoming changes.

Don't disagree its going to break things. What would be best way to
let the users know? Shipping early and fixing before 2.x seems
pragmatic to me. (Would prefer a rock solid major release and unstable
point release.)

> I'll get off my soapbox now, but I do believe we should be catering to our
> users a bit more.

Agree --- you think its worthwhile if I prep a big ol' blog post
warning them of the changes, why we're making them?

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

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

On 12-02-24 2:49 PM, "Becky Gibson" <gi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Mobile-spec has had some changes to accomodate the unified-js - Thus there
>will be errors on platforms that have not implemented unified js.  Plus,
>we
>are still finding bugs in unified JS on the "completed" platforms.

I believe there was only one change to mobile-spec you are mentioning here
Becky and that is the change from 'ToURI' to 'ToURL' for the File object -
which simply returns FileObject.fullPath. Very easy to revert if you think
this is a show-stopper.

>
>My issue is that by releasing unified-js over different releases we are
>making it much harder on our users!  IMHO we haven't adequately warned
>users about all the upcoming changes.

How are we making it harder? Mobile-spec passes (passes better with
cordova-js on Android than previous implementation). Our users still just
require a JS file - end result is the same. API still works.

The only concerning thing for me are the file system root / pathing issues
that came up on Android - which we can also solve/revert pretty quickly to
what we had before, and work out the cross-platform consistency of pathing
and file system resolution for 1.6.

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

[Becky Gibson <gi...@gmail.com>]

Mobile-spec has had some changes to accomodate the unified-js - Thus there
will be errors on platforms that have not implemented unified js.  Plus, we
are still finding bugs in unified JS on the "completed" platforms.

My issue is that by releasing unified-js over different releases we are
making it much harder on our users!  IMHO we haven't adequately warned
users about all the upcoming changes.

I'll get off my soapbox now, but I do believe we should be catering to our
users a bit more.
-becky





On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Bryce Curtis <cu...@gmail.com>wrote:

> I'm assuming that the APIs exposed to the users have remained the same and
> are consisted between Android unified JS and iOS, BB, etc.  That implies
> the docs are still in sync.  If this is not the case, then I would agree
> that there's a problem.  Isn't that what mobile-spec tests?  Or do we not
> have adequate coverage?
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>
> > yeah, I figured we'd just vendor it in on the platforms where its
> complete?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hey
> > >
> > > I thought we were only going forward with Android on this one and that
> > the
> > > Unified JS for the other platforms was going to happen on 1.6.
> > >
> > > Joe
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Becky Gibson <gibson.becky@gmail.com
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have serious concerns about releasing 1.5 with only partial
> > >> implementation of the unified JS code.   This release will be nearly
> > >> unusable for people who develop for more than one platform.  First,
>  we
> > are
> > >> breaking their existing code will all of the renaming.   I understand
> > that
> > >> is inevitable.  People will grumble but it had do be done in order to
> > move
> > >> forward within Apache.
> > >>
> > >> But, in addition to the rename we are modifying the apis on SOME
> > platforms.
> > >>  API changes can be subtle and painful to fix.  Do we have them all
> well
> > >> documented?  In addition to finding and making the api changes, folks
> > who
> > >> develop for more than one platform will have to have divergent code
> for
> > the
> > >> different platforms.  Only to have to change it again, for 1.6 when
> the
> > >> unified JS is completed.   That doesn't seem right and a cruel thing
> to
> > do
> > >> to our loyal community.   Why not wait until the unified JS is
> complete
> > and
> > >> at least keep all of the changes within one release?   What is the
> rush
> > to
> > >> get out a 1.5? Is there any real harm in putting it off? Are the bug
> > fixes
> > >> that MUST get in?   Just my humble opinion that we should hold off on
> > 1.5
> > >> until the unified JS is more fully baked.  As an FYI - iOS is going to
> > take
> > >> me awhile (re: "API changes can be subtle and painful to fix").
> > >>
> > >> -becky
> > >>
> >
>

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

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

I'm assuming that the APIs exposed to the users have remained the same and
are consisted between Android unified JS and iOS, BB, etc.  That implies
the docs are still in sync.  If this is not the case, then I would agree
that there's a problem.  Isn't that what mobile-spec tests?  Or do we not
have adequate coverage?

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:

> yeah, I figured we'd just vendor it in on the platforms where its complete?
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hey
> >
> > I thought we were only going forward with Android on this one and that
> the
> > Unified JS for the other platforms was going to happen on 1.6.
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Becky Gibson <gibson.becky@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I have serious concerns about releasing 1.5 with only partial
> >> implementation of the unified JS code.   This release will be nearly
> >> unusable for people who develop for more than one platform.  First,  we
> are
> >> breaking their existing code will all of the renaming.   I understand
> that
> >> is inevitable.  People will grumble but it had do be done in order to
> move
> >> forward within Apache.
> >>
> >> But, in addition to the rename we are modifying the apis on SOME
> platforms.
> >>  API changes can be subtle and painful to fix.  Do we have them all well
> >> documented?  In addition to finding and making the api changes, folks
> who
> >> develop for more than one platform will have to have divergent code for
> the
> >> different platforms.  Only to have to change it again, for 1.6 when the
> >> unified JS is completed.   That doesn't seem right and a cruel thing to
> do
> >> to our loyal community.   Why not wait until the unified JS is complete
> and
> >> at least keep all of the changes within one release?   What is the rush
> to
> >> get out a 1.5? Is there any real harm in putting it off? Are the bug
> fixes
> >> that MUST get in?   Just my humble opinion that we should hold off on
> 1.5
> >> until the unified JS is more fully baked.  As an FYI - iOS is going to
> take
> >> me awhile (re: "API changes can be subtle and painful to fix").
> >>
> >> -becky
> >>
>

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

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

yeah, I figured we'd just vendor it in on the platforms where its complete?



On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Joe Bowser <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey
>
> I thought we were only going forward with Android on this one and that the
> Unified JS for the other platforms was going to happen on 1.6.
>
> Joe
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Becky Gibson <gi...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I have serious concerns about releasing 1.5 with only partial
>> implementation of the unified JS code.   This release will be nearly
>> unusable for people who develop for more than one platform.  First,  we are
>> breaking their existing code will all of the renaming.   I understand that
>> is inevitable.  People will grumble but it had do be done in order to move
>> forward within Apache.
>>
>> But, in addition to the rename we are modifying the apis on SOME platforms.
>>  API changes can be subtle and painful to fix.  Do we have them all well
>> documented?  In addition to finding and making the api changes, folks who
>> develop for more than one platform will have to have divergent code for the
>> different platforms.  Only to have to change it again, for 1.6 when the
>> unified JS is completed.   That doesn't seem right and a cruel thing to do
>> to our loyal community.   Why not wait until the unified JS is complete and
>> at least keep all of the changes within one release?   What is the rush to
>> get out a 1.5? Is there any real harm in putting it off? Are the bug fixes
>> that MUST get in?   Just my humble opinion that we should hold off on 1.5
>> until the unified JS is more fully baked.  As an FYI - iOS is going to take
>> me awhile (re: "API changes can be subtle and painful to fix").
>>
>> -becky
>>

Re: Concerns about releasing 1.5

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

Hey

I thought we were only going forward with Android on this one and that the
Unified JS for the other platforms was going to happen on 1.6.

Joe

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Becky Gibson <gi...@gmail.com>wrote:

> I have serious concerns about releasing 1.5 with only partial
> implementation of the unified JS code.   This release will be nearly
> unusable for people who develop for more than one platform.  First,  we are
> breaking their existing code will all of the renaming.   I understand that
> is inevitable.  People will grumble but it had do be done in order to move
> forward within Apache.
>
> But, in addition to the rename we are modifying the apis on SOME platforms.
>  API changes can be subtle and painful to fix.  Do we have them all well
> documented?  In addition to finding and making the api changes, folks who
> develop for more than one platform will have to have divergent code for the
> different platforms.  Only to have to change it again, for 1.6 when the
> unified JS is completed.   That doesn't seem right and a cruel thing to do
> to our loyal community.   Why not wait until the unified JS is complete and
> at least keep all of the changes within one release?   What is the rush to
> get out a 1.5? Is there any real harm in putting it off? Are the bug fixes
> that MUST get in?   Just my humble opinion that we should hold off on 1.5
> until the unified JS is more fully baked.  As an FYI - iOS is going to take
> me awhile (re: "API changes can be subtle and painful to fix").
>
> -becky
>