cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jesse MacFadyen <>
Subject Re: Platform-level command line scripts
Date Wed, 20 Mar 2013 08:14:27 GMT
Welcome Parashuram!
Happy to have some help. Benn has been working on most of this, and I
have created the deploy tools for wp7 and wp8, so reach out if you
need guidance or anything.


Sent from my iPhone5

On 2013-03-19, at 10:24 PM, "Parashuram Narasimhan (MS OPEN TECH)"
<> wrote:


I could offer to start helping on the Windows Phone side of things.

P.S: This is my first email to the group, and I think I should
introduce myself - I am Parashuram, working for Microsoft Open
Technologies Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Filip Maj []
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2013 3:42 PM
Subject: Platform-level command line scripts

Bringing this up once more, hopefully the last time :)

TL;DR: the behavior and naming of the platform-level scripts are still
not 100% lined up. I'd like to fix this and agree with you all on some
of the finer points surrounding this issue.

Benn Mapes, an intern at Adobe, has been working on adding Windows
Phone support to cordova-cli. It's been a bit of work, but the first
step is to land command line scripts at the Windows Phone project
level, which he is actively working on. With this happening, I want to
make sure we have our base project-level CLI scripts sorted properly.

Additionally, I've been seeing issues filed against the CLI with
essentially users being confused as to why the behavior of "cordova
vs "cordova emulate" on different platforms is different [1] [2].

The answer to all of this is that the project-level scripts have
slightly different behavior. I've looked into what each of Android,
iOS and BlackBerry (10) do and I've got a basic table sorted out
(below). I would like to get to an agreement on naming and behavior
for each, and ideally file issues to get as many of our platform
implementations as possible to implement/tweak behavior so that we are
consistent on this front.


- build
  - Android: equivalent of running `ant debug`, which simply compiles
your app in debug mode
  - BB10: packages your app into a zip, runs `bbwp` on it, and code-signs it
  - iOS: runs a compilation with xcodebuild with configuration set to "Debug"
- clean
  - Android: equivalent of running `ant clean`, which removes any
build artifacts
  - BB10: does not exist
  - iOS: does not exist
- log
  - Android: `adb logcat`
  - BB10: does not exist
  - iOS: `tail -f console.log`
- release:
  - Android `ant release`, compiles with your actual signing key
  - BB10: NOPE
  - iOS: compiles with xcodebuild with configuration set to "Release"
- run:
  - Android: runs on EITHER a connected device, or if no device, on a
running emulator, or if no running emulator, launches an emulator (and
if multiple emulator profiles exist, prompts user to pick one), then
finally runs the app on it
  - BB10: asks user if there's a connected device. Then either
launches a simulator + loads the app (if user says he/she has no
connected device), or attempts runs a debug build of the app on a
connected device
  - iOS: launches an emulator using ios-sim with the app
- emulate:
  - Android: does not exist
  - BB10: does not exist
  - iOS: launches an emulator using ios-sim with the app

Easy Wins

- build: BB10 should change current behaviour so that it doesn't code
sign the package.
- clean: add scripts for BB10 and iOS to support this (should be dead simple).
- release: BB10 should implement a script that runs a build + a
code-sign on the built package.

Harder Wins

There's confusing behavior with run + emulate commands across platforms.
IMO emulate should handle launching an emulator, and run should handle
deployment, with an extra flag available for run command that
specifies the deployment target (device or emulator, perhaps --device
and --emulator). Also not entirely sure how Ripple fits in here but I
would definitely like to see Ripple as the default emulator target.

Lots to chew on here but I would highly appreciate some feedback!
Renaming some of these commands is on the table too if anyone sees
benefit there!


View raw message