cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian LeRoux...@brian.io>
Subject Re: CDVLogger went away in master
Date Tue, 02 Jul 2013 21:37:14 GMT
I love that idea. Makes transitioning easy.
On Jul 2, 2013 1:38 PM, "Michal Mocny" <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:

> perhaps platforms should support plugin dependencies?
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Tyler - remote web inspector works for iOS 6 on device, not just in the
> > simulator.
> >
> > I removed the logger since it got moved to the cordova-plugin-console
> repo.
> > To be clear, is the proposal here to delete that repo?
> >
> > I'd like to see it remain *not* in core only because it can be written
> as a
> > plugin. Let's just have it installed by default by CLI?
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Tyler Wilson <twilson@pulse-robotics.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Another view: what percentage of developers use the console.log API
> > during
> > > development? I would think that the vast majority do. So why add a step
> > for
> > > a feature that most developers use or need? My Cordova work has been
> > mostly
> > > done on-device, since I am using a custom plug-in that requires the
> > > hardware. So until there is a way to debug the JS on-device, I am
> highly
> > > dependent on the console.log functionality.
> > >
> > > So basically +1 keep in core for me.
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Tyler
> > >
> > > On Jul 2, 2013, at 3:22 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Its a good point about ios6+. I can't imagine anyone is developing
> for
> > > > anything less (other than corodva@<=2.9 legacy support).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> To answer the question of why we may want to leave it out:
> > > >>
> > > >> - If you are using remote debugging on ios6+ you don't need it
> > > >> - Our log wrapper has been repeatedly less functional than the
> system
> > > >> implementation (though we do fix these issues as they are found)
> > > >>
> > > >> But that does not mean I am arguing against leaving it in by
> default.
> > > >> Idealist me says 3.0.0 should move everything that can be a plugin
> out
> > > to
> > > >> a plugin.  Pragmatist me says this is pretty safe/useful in core.
>  +0
> > > vote
> > > >> here either way.
> > > >>
> > > >> Perhaps we could have a set of "default" plugins that are installed,
> > but
> > > >> can be un-installed?  This would give us best of both worlds.
> > > >>
> > > >> -Michal
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Filip Maj <fil@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> The only one I can think of is a production environment to try
to
> > save
> > > on
> > > >>> a few kb of footprint and a few initialization cycles. I don't
> think
> > > it's
> > > >>> worth removing entirely from core, though. Instead, try to make
the
> > > >>> built-in Logger plugin as easily removable as possible.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 7/2/13 9:57 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cmarcelk@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Are there a scenarios where it would be good to not have Logger
in
> > an
> > > >>>> app, such as permissions, footprint, or just not needing any
> logging
> > > >>>> functionality? I'm having a tough time thinking of any, so
I'd
> also
> > > say:
> > > >>>> +1 leaving Logger in core
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

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