Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cordova.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of brian.leroux@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.223.176 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: brian.leroux@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAMk5LL=PZfts7tQY02WWzmgwfJGw7e8Ly=xzn6n1rDQDjDdYfA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CADVgkyMzJcNORz1NAUVFv-Kjg+vE-DKeVTpb7HoKysX-T80=3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMk5LLkG7=LgwQaiBoeLk-z4nmVExGfw22UiNjUcuEqMPpaOFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BE9C7D0E-37A7-4AF1-BC39-81D9DD11586F@gmail.com>
	<CADVgkyP0wGt8GefS_sRKK+DNH9yy8n1ano_JMqo-ufDbjgpRTw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABiQX1Xoy-iFsXsi1Yoxeg6PzX3xbhOMHorvHL_oOMDh8MUViA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADVgkyOcv2MDUEqyEMb_hZ=0AN-ZQcB_NS6kbRGULbNDN2S1+Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEeF2Td3Uy0b=2dCiqQOKnPh93xeQaBzU+PQmRod6TzxdhOSaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADVgkyP8O3WMpsTtob_ahL9oYfC_AkxX3n1RUFKToXtqkMZ8sA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMk5LL=PZfts7tQY02WWzmgwfJGw7e8Ly=xzn6n1rDQDjDdYfA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 10:39:10 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CADVgkyMxpPA4hP4iLySDOM4rkTmipt_ooq4_WuiTLDsW8vai8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [cordova-cli] vendoring the platforms instead of lazy download
From: Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io>
To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

To be clear, I am certain we all agree, but this is the future. We're
working towards that future. We simply have too many users to not
build the transition path into our releases. Maybe 3.0 is that time.
Four months to move everything to plugins only. We'll see if we make
it.


On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Braden Shepherdson <braden@chromium.org> wrote:
> I don't think there's a better place for that transition than moving to
> 3.0, though. It's already a huge change with the CLI and plugins and the
> rest. Also one of the key advantages to splitting up the core into plugins
> is that we wanted to separate the permissions so that Cordova apps don't
> ask for everything all the time, but only what they actually need.
>
> -1 to installing all the core plugins by default, and to lockstep
> versioning them to the tools.
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>
>> Offline happens!
>>
>> I think by default nobody needs ANY of our APIs but the transition to
>> that thinking will be the trick.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:
>> > Hmm, but then the versioning of the core plugins is tied to the version
>> of
>> > your cordova-cli tool at install time?
>> >
>> > I'm not opposed to installing cordova-core plugins by default which can
>> > optionally be used as a fallback when or something, but I'm not sure that
>> > every app you create should by default include those.  You are right,
>> this
>> > is worthy of a longer discussion.
>> >
>> > (p.s. who goes offline?)
>> >
>> > -Michal
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Good question.
>> >>
>> >> My intuition is saying for as long as 3.x is around we preload w/ core
>> >> plugins. We'll do as such w/ the PhoneGap distribution to minimize
>> >> pain. Once ppl are used to the tools they'll be asking for us to
>> >> default to none.
>> >>
>> >> My thoughts where that we'd start that way w/ Cordova but thats open
>> too.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Yep, my biggest concern is that we are able to use CLI but still work
>> >> > against master. I think braden's ask covers that though.
>> >> >
>> >> > What good is working offline if you have no plugins? Are you
>> suggesting
>> >> > that we also include some set of plugins inside of cordova-cli?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> It big. Certainly would be more efficient to lazy load, and cache so
>> >> >> offline works.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Gord Tanner <gtanner@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >> > There was some issues over download size for our cli, any idea what
>> >> the
>> >> >> size of all the platforms are?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Sent from my iPhone
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > On 2013-03-22, at 1:42 PM, Braden Shepherdson <braden@chromium.org
>> >
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> I'm content to have the vendoring, it has some advantages as you
>> >> wrote.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> However, I would also very much like to add a platform that's
>> running
>> >> >> from
>> >> >> >> somewhere on my local disk, as I described in my feature request
>> in
>> >> the
>> >> >> doc.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> So I propose a flag like cordova platform add android
>> >> >> >> --target=../../cordova-android   where that local directory can
>> have
>> >> >> >> whatever locally patched code I want.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Braden
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> Right now we put the release of Cordova into the npm package for
>> >> >> >>> cordova-cli and we version lock the two. (Codova/CLI 2.5.x ===
>> >> >> >>> Cordova/Platform 2.5.latest).
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> We did this because:
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> - has to work offline
>> >> >> >>> - cannot have a Git dep to do development
>> >> >> >>> - issue tracking locked to the real version of Cordova
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> We can solve all these issues. The code to do that isn't really a
>> >> huge
>> >> >> >>> deal. But to add it we gain very little that isn't already
>> achieved
>> >> by
>> >> >> >>> vendoring. I'd like for us to be aware the current can be
>> improved
>> >> but
>> >> >> >>> its low priority compared to, say, ripple and plugin integration.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>>