cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
Subject Re: Creating repos for core plugins
Date Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:38:39 GMT
Before I go ahead with this, let's agree upon the repo names / which
plugins to include.

Here's the proposed list:

Repos to create:

cordova-plugin-accelerometer
cordova-plugin-battery
cordova-plugin-camera
cordova-plugin-capture
cordova-plugin-compass
cordova-plugin-contacts
cordova-plugin-device
cordova-plugin-file
cordova-plugin-geolocation
cordova-plugin-globalization
cordova-plugin-logger
cordova-plugin-media
cordova-plugin-networkstatus
cordova-plugin-notification
cordova-plugin-splashscreen
cordova-plugin-inappbrowser

Note that I have device and network status in this list. Plugins that delay
ondeviceready just add themselves to channel.deviceReadyChannelsArray.

Plugins *not* getting their own Repo:

blackberry/plugin/java/app
android/plugin/android/app
android/plugin/android/storage
errgen/plugin/errgen
ios/plugin/ios/console (seems like this should be merged into the logger
plugin)
windowsphone/plugin/windowsphone/DOMStorage
windowsphone/plugin/windowsphone/XHRPatch
windowsphone/plugin/windowsphone/console
iOS's CDVLocalStorage.m


On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org> wrote:

> Great! Sounds like an agreement :). I'll file an INFRA to get them created.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 on separate repos. It's the sane choice.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Jesse <purplecabbage@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > +1, I agree on the separate repositories.
>> > I still contend that nothing should need to be 'built' and there should
>> be
>> > NO dependencies on the plugins from cordova-js, ( aside from device.js +
>> > network.js which are both required pre device ready, and I think should
>> > remain in the cordova-js repo )
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Anis KADRI <anis.kadri@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > +1 for separate repositories. Should take a bit longer than normal to
>> > > package a release but not too long especially if the repos are pulled
>> > from
>> > > a local source (ie no network overhead).
>> > > I'd be ok to ship a set of default plugins and give the ability for
>> > people
>> > > to build their 'own' Cordova.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I'm in favor of discreet plugin repos. It shouldn't effect a release
>> > > > if we automate install/remove and add to the Coho tool... though
>> > > > perhaps this is a naive assumption.
>> > > >
>> > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > Thought it'd be worth having a discussion around whether we want
a
>> > > > separate
>> > > > > repo for each core plugin or not.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > As far as I can see, we can either have all core plugins in one
>> repo,
>> > > or
>> > > > > have each in it's own and call them:
>> > > > > cordova-plugin-file
>> > > > > cordova-plugin-network
>> > > > > cordova-plugin-media
>> > > > > etc...
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I think my preference would be to have them as their own repos
so
>> > that
>> > > it
>> > > > > will be easier to add/remove lists of plugins to the "which ones
>> are
>> > > > core"
>> > > > > list. It will also let us version them separately (if we want
to
>> do
>> > > > this).
>> > > > >
>> > > > > The downside is that it may take longer to perform a release?
>> Would
>> > we
>> > > > even
>> > > > > bundle the plugins with releases anyways though?
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > @purplecabbage
>> > risingj.com
>> >
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message