cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon MacDonald <simon.macdon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Plugin packages on Android
Date Mon, 15 Jul 2013 18:30:06 GMT
The reason things broke back then was we didn't leave in shims to point
anyone compiling against com.phonegap.api to org.apache.cordova.api. That
was quickly corrected.

I agree with the package name change but with 3.0 shipping this week(?). It
should probably wait until the next version.


Simon Mac Donald
http://hi.im/simonmacdonald


On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:

> No. You are proposing an API change. A package is most certainly a
> part of the API! When we moved from `com.phonegap` to `org.apache`
> there was a huge outcry b/c it broke all existing community plugins.
>
> I'm completely open to changing stuff for 3.0 but, again, what
> specifically are you proposing we change?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:43 AM, Anis KADRI <anis.kadri@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I agree. The only downside I see is that it will be hard to dissociate
> core
> > plugins from other but I don't think it's really that important. Also
> > because it's not a giant change it could happen for 3.0.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Max Woghiren <maxw@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not proposing any API changes in this email; example (1) does
> mention
> >> the relocation of FileHelper.java, but that's more to illustrate the
> >> benefits of repackaging the plugins.
> >>
> >> I would think the plugin package change should happen *for* 3.0, before
> >> people actually start using the plugins all bundled in one package.
>  It's
> >> not a giant change.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I think all of this makes good sense but will have to land sometime
> >> > post 3.0 as that we're pretty much in the final stretch now anyhow.
> >> > Which APIs are you specifically proposing we change?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 9:14 AM, Max Woghiren <maxw@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> >> > > On Android, all Cordova plugins are in the package
> >> > org.apache.cordova.core.
> >> > >  It makes sense to put each plugin into its own package.  Aside from
> >> > 3.0's
> >> > > conceptual shift into "plugins as completely individual entities"
> and
> >> the
> >> > > fact that plugins aren't really "core", here's some rationale:
> >> > >
> >> > >    1. If two plugins have a file with the same name, we'll avoid
> >> > >    collisions.  For instance, core Cordova has FileHelper.java.
>  This
> >> is
> >> > the
> >> > >    wrong place for it in 3.0 and we'd like to move it to the plugins
> >> > that use
> >> > >    it (removing unused methods in each plugin's version).  However,
> >> this
> >> > will
> >> > >    lead to a collision in apps that use two of these plugins, since
> >> > they'll
> >> > >    both be in the same package.
> >> > >    2. All plugin files will be separated into their packages in your
> >> IDE.
> >> > >     This makes working on an individual plugin easier—you can see
> the
> >> > >    associated files at a glance.  If I'm working on a plugin with
> >> > multiple
> >> > >    files, I shouldn't have to hunt for related files to ensure I'm
> not
> >> > missing
> >> > >    anything.
> >> > >    3. Since our plugins will be used as starting points for
> third-party
> >> > >    plugins, we won't accidentally encourage plugin developers to use
> >> the
> >> > same
> >> > >    namespace.
> >> > >
> >> > > I would propose something like
> org.apache.cordova.plugin.<plugin_name>.
> >> >
> >>
>

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