cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian LeRoux...@brian.io>
Subject Re: New directory structure in cordova-cli's future branch
Date Mon, 15 Apr 2013 22:59:28 GMT
I'd rather we did not go ahead w/ the new directory structure. It offers no
functional benefit, and comes at an upgrade cost for ppl using the CLI
tools today.


On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>wrote:

> Just catching up on the past week of emails and it's not clear that there
> was a consensus here. By the sounds of it though:
>
> 1. Lots of users are using Cordova-CLI (master branch)
> 2. Cordova-CLI's "future" branch has non-backwards-compatible changes.
> 3. One of these changes is the directory structure.
>
> The main debate is on how to message these changes to users. What we should
> do is:
>
> 1. Have an upgrade guide. (e.g. paths are now relative to plugin.xml)
> 2. Ensure that our error handling shows useful messages when they result
> from an old-way-of-doing-things (e.g. your app's structure doesn't match.)
>
> Rather than printing out the commands to run to convert their project,
> maybe we could have them in the upgrade guide and have the error messages
> point to the guide?
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Tim Kim <timkim85@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Braden I have merged master and the future branch:
> > https://github.com/timkim/plugman/tree/future_master_merge
> >
> > I think it's about ready to merge back in to future. I've gotten the
> > android-one-install and the ios-config-xml-install (minus one weird test
> I
> > don't understand) working.
> >
> >
> > On 10 April 2013 14:42, Anis KADRI <anis.kadri@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > As far as I am concerned I don't really have a strong opinion on this
> > > topic. As I said in the previous thread, I do like this new directory
> > > structure and if you have it there and tested then fine. We break shit
> > all
> > > the time it's not like this change is one too many. What matters is to
> > > communicate it to our users and give them an upgrade path to this new
> app
> > > structure (the Cordova docs are a good place for that).
> > >
> > > However, I agree with Brian that there are more important things to
> > tackle
> > > right now. Now sure what you had on your list but since js only modules
> > are
> > > in Plugman right now (untested) The next big thing that is going to be
> > > non-trivial is: plugin dependencies (which will in some ways involve
> > > discovery I think). We should have a discussion about that (hangout,
> IRC,
> > > connect...whatever). I have a couple of ideas about that.
> > >
> > > Tim is working on fixing/adding/updating plugman tests and it looks
> like
> > > he's making good progress on it.
> > >
> > > -a
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Michael Wolf <
> Michael.Wolf@cynergy.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > I get the intention, however anything we can do to reduce this type
> of
> > > > breaking change should be done.   These type of changes should be
> > > > considered for major releases only so users can plan for them.
> > > >
> > > > mw
> > > >
> > > > On 4/9/13 5:05 PM, "Jesse" <purplecabbage@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >+1 to the sanity plea of devgeek Tommy
> > > > >
> > > > >Also, if it didn't happen on this list, ....
> > > > >'Consensus' should always be tracked back to a thread here,
> regardless
> > > of
> > > > >meetings, hangouts, irc, bbs, ...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >@purplecabbage
> > > > >risingj.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 1:48 PM, tommy-carlos Williams
> > > > ><tommy@devgeeks.org>wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Sorry, but as someone that helps users everyday, the almost "it's
> > > alpha,
> > > > >> they shoulda seen it coming" tone of this is a bit upsetting.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> It reminds me of before the deprecation policy, etc when PhoneGap
> > > would
> > > > >> completely break everything whenever a new version came out.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I feel like we have come a long way since then (with a ways still
> to
> > > go,
> > > > >> no question about it).  I would hate to be the one in IRC and
on
> the
> > > > >>Google
> > > > >> Group list having to explain this to everyone using the cli.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I was under the impression that the cli was "shipping" now, not
> > just a
> > > > >> little side thing. I know that quite a few people are using it
for
> > > real
> > > > >> apps (myself included). If that is true, then we have a duty
to at
> > > least
> > > > >> think very carefully before breaking something and come up with
a
> > good
> > > > >>plan
> > > > >> for easing that transition.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> - tommy
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 10/04/2013, at 1:40, Braden Shepherdson <braden@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > This mailing list post is, or will shortly be, indexed by
Google
> > and
> > > > >> > others. Any newcomers will see the new docs and create new
> > projects.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > As I mentioned on IRC, existing users are either accepting
or
> > > ignoring
> > > > >> the
> > > > >> > "alpha" warnings that this software is new and under heavy
> > > > >>development,
> > > > >> and
> > > > >> > if they want to jump on it early they're going to have to
expect
> > > some
> > > > >> pain.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > That said, I don't really know of any better way to socialize
> it.
> > Is
> > > > >> there
> > > > >> > anywhere where a brief blog post on this would make sense?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > I don't know how many people are using these tools and not
on
> the
> > > > >>mailing
> > > > >> > list, though certainly some turn up on IRC occasionally.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Braden
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> How will we communicate this change to our existing
users?
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> On 4/9/13 5:22 PM, "Braden Shepherdson" <braden@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>> I've just pushed a change to the future branch that
changes
> the
> > > > >> directory
> > > > >> >>> structure to:
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> app/
> > > > >> >>>   merges/
> > > > >> >>>       android/
> > > > >> >>>       ios/
> > > > >> >>>   www/
> > > > >> >>>   config.xml
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> As was discussed at our video conference meeting
a couple of
> > weeks
> > > > >>ago,
> > > > >> >>> this has a number of advantages:
> > > > >> >>> - config.xml is no longer in the www/ directory
> > > > >> >>> - One can easily version control the whole app/
directory, and
> > get
> > > > >> their
> > > > >> >>> web assets, merges and so on into the repo.
> > > > >> >>> - That repo can contain additional information:
a README.md,
> > > > >> supplementary
> > > > >> >>> documentation, tests, whatever. The CLI will ignore
anything
> > > > >>outside of
> > > > >> >>> the
> > > > >> >>> merges and www directories.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> The downside is that this is a breaking change:
running the
> new
> > > > >> version of
> > > > >> >>> the tools on an old project will fail (but I think
in a
> harmless
> > > > >>way)
> > > > >> >>> until
> > > > >> >>> you rearrange the directories. You can do that with
the
> > following
> > > > >> >>> commands:
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> $ mkdir app
> > > > >> >>> $ mv www/config.xml app
> > > > >> >>> $ mv www app
> > > > >> >>> $ mv merges app
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> All docs and tests are updated as well. Any problems
should be
> > > > >> reported on
> > > > >> >>> JIRA and assigned to me.
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> Braden
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Timothy Kim
> >
>

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