cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: <plugins> tag, and accessing the plugin list
Date Thu, 14 Nov 2013 19:19:32 GMT
Let's google hangout about this and report back to the list yeah ?

My main concern is user confusion like here [1]. When a plugin fails
to load/work, people start looking around config files and wonder why
it's broken and I feel like the more config stuff we add the more
confusion it creates.

[1] https://github.com/imhotep/MapKit/issues/18#issuecomment-25952856

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Braden Shepherdson
<braden@chromium.org> wrote:
> I apologize for getting somewhat short in my previous email.
>
> Let me explain my comment on needing "more, and more hacky, code". Because
> of how Plugman parses the <config-file> tags and makes the edits to the XML
> files, it would require special-case logic to find <feature> tags and
> inject this extra information into them. Only some <config-file> tags are
> pointing at the right file and XPath, and this would have Plugman examining
> the children of <config-file> tags instead of treating it as a black box
> and copying it in. My proposal of injecting new tags doesn't require
> anything like that, Plugman just adds an extra config-munge entry for each
> plugin, after it's finished parsing the <config-file> tags. The patch to
> implement this only added a few lines.
>
> This information is being injected by Plugman into the platform config.xml
> (the build artifact) at plugman-prepare time. It isn't visible directly to
> plugin devs, app devs, or users. But it allows an app or plugin dev who
> wants to know what plugins are installed to find out. This allows checking
> for an optional dependency, and lets AppHarness check compatibility of its
> own plugins with those required by a child app.
>
> Braden
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm going to attempt to summarize in point form:
>>
>> Goal:
>>  - Make available the list of installed plugins and their versions to
>> native side & JS side.
>>  - Needed by App Harness to know whether an app is compatible with its
>> bundled set of plugins.
>>
>> Using cordova_plugins.js:
>>  - It doesn't have the information that we need
>>  - We could add the extra information, but not easily since the file
>> exports an array instead of an object.
>>  - This file is not currently parsed by the native layer, so having the
>> info here would be an extra IO on start-up.
>>
>> Using config.xml:
>>  - It doesn't have the information that we need
>>  - This is always loaded by native sides, so it's a nice fit.
>>
>> Using <feature>:
>>  - These are for defining Bridge channels
>>  - Plugins define 0 or more of these
>>  - Adding empty ones for plugins that don't define them causes exceptions
>> in the native layer. We'd like this change to not break older versions of
>> cordova.
>>
>> So, although it seems like <feature> would make sense, we've already used
>> <feature> to mean something else (bridge channels).
>>
>> I think Braden's suggestion of adding a new tag is the simplest, both
>> implementation-wise, as well as semantically (it has a single, well-defined
>> purpose). What I especially like about it, is that it separates which tags
>> are written by plugin devs (<feature>) from tags that are generated by
>> plugman (<cordova-plugin>)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>>
>> > Ok, everybody be calm. We are adults and we are capable of working
>> through
>> > this in a dispassionate manner and has nothing to do with you, your code,
>> > or whatever. We all just want to find the best solution. Blankets
>> > statements like 'more hacky code' does no good. Let's just stick to
>> factual
>> > stuff and stay away from subjective identification. Ok?
>> >
>> > "as to leaking into userland, these <feature> tags are relevant to plugin
>> > developers" ... so would this particular information belong to
>> > plugin.xml????
>> >
>> > Also, Joe had a good question earlier. Despite all this problem solving I
>> > have no idea what the actual problem is we are trying to solve. We have
>> > lots of solutions but what precisely do our users gain from runtime
>> > introspection here?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Braden Shepherdson <
>> braden@chromium.org
>> > >wrote:
>> >
>> > > Brian, as to leaking into userland, these <feature> tags are relevant
>> to
>> > > plugin developers, since they have to define the mapping of exec names
>> to
>> > > native files so we can load their plugins. None of this is visible to
>> app
>> > > developers or end users.
>> > >
>> > > We're not paying by the byte, or the top-level tag, in config.xml. NB
>> > that
>> > > this is the platform config.xml, the one that's a build artifact no one
>> > but
>> > > the platform code is ever supposed to look at. Why are we sweating so
>> > hard
>> > > over adding some new information into the file, and trying to shoehorn
>> it
>> > > into existing tags? The code to handle this is simpler in Plugman and
>> on
>> > > the platforms to have this be a separate tag, rather than mixing it in
>> > with
>> > > <feature>.
>> > >
>> > > If we want to use <feature> tags for this, despite it requiring more,
>> and
>> > > more hacky, code all around, we're going to need a good reason. I
>> haven't
>> > > heard any reason for why using <feature> gains us anything.
>> > >
>> > > Carlos, as I noted in my remixed proposal above, I originally wanted to
>> > use
>> > > cordova_plugins.js or a similar www/ file for this, but there are
>> > problems
>> > > with that. On the other hand, I would much rather add a new file that
>> can
>> > > be loaded as a js-module than do this using hacked-up <feature> tags.
>> > >
>> > > Braden
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Don Coleman <don.coleman@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > JavaScript only plugin implementations are valid on BlackBerry 10.
>> Some
>> > > > things that require native code on Android can be implemented in
>> client
>> > > > side JavaScript on BlackBerry using com.blackberry.invoke.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
>> > > > > > First thing: might as well give up on referencing config.xml as a
>> > > > > standard.
>> > > > > > That's a historical footnote of little relevance anymore!
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > It feels leaky to define the mapping in <feature>. Would seem to
>> me
>> > > > that
>> > > > > > <feature> is a userland thing from a user perspective I want to
>> > know
>> > > > > about
>> > > > > > the ID and VERSION and the guts of what happens under the hood is
>> > > none
>> > > > of
>> > > > > > business. No?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > This is actually where the mapping happens right now, and I really
>> > > > > don't want to change this, since changing mapping would break
>> > > > > EVERYTHING.  That being said, I don't know why we can't have
>> feature
>> > > > > tags with no *-package params.  That being said, I'm not sure what
>> > the
>> > > > > point would even be, since JS-only plugins aren't really plugins at
>> > > > > all and are just Javascript libraries.  Are there current examples
>> of
>> > > > > this in Cordova currently?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Braden Shepherdson <
>> > > > braden@chromium.org
>> > > > > >wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> I'm going to try to summarize some points so we can get on the
>> > same
>> > > > > page.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> tl;dr: see the last two paragraphs for what I'm actually
>> > proposing.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> First, background on why we have <feature> tags. They map a
>> bridge
>> > > > name
>> > > > > >> (eg. "FileTransfer" on all platforms) used with cordova.exec()
>> to
>> > > the
>> > > > > >> native code module that implements the plugin (eg.
>> > > > > >> "org.apache.cordova.filetransfer.FileTransfer" on Android,
>> > > > > >> "CDVFileTransfer" on iOS, etc.). The native side of the bridge
>> > uses
>> > > > this
>> > > > > >> information to load and call the right plugin's implementation
>> > > after a
>> > > > > >> cordova.exec() call.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> Note that a plugin can define 0 or more <feature> tags. Plugins
>> > with
>> > > > no
>> > > > > >> native code won't have one. In principle, a plugin can have more
>> > > than
>> > > > > one,
>> > > > > >> though we can't think of any examples of that.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> When I first looked at this problem of wanting to know, at
>> > runtime,
>> > > > what
>> > > > > >> plugins are installed, I originally considered using
>> > > > cordova_plugins.js
>> > > > > to
>> > > > > >> learn the information. There are two problems here. One, the
>> file
>> > > > > doesn't
>> > > > > >> include information about plugin id and version. We could add
>> it,
>> > > but
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > >> second problem is that cordova_plugins.js maps <js-module> names
>> > > (used
>> > > > > with
>> > > > > >> cordova.require()) to file names. Here again any one plugin can
>> > > have 0
>> > > > > or
>> > > > > >> more <js-modules>; many have several.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> I then considered using the <feature> tags. The same problems
>> > apply
>> > > > > here:
>> > > > > >> they don't map 1-1, and don't have the data we need.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> Others in the thread have proposed adding this data to the
>> > <feature>
>> > > > > tags,
>> > > > > >> and adding <feature> tags automatically for plugins that don't
>> > > already
>> > > > > have
>> > > > > >> one (or alternatively, adding a new, autogenerated <feature> for
>> > > every
>> > > > > >> plugin). The problem here is that the various native platforms
>> are
>> > > > > >> expecting each <feature> to define a bridge name -> native code
>> > > module
>> > > > > >> mapping, and these new ones won't do so. This is a potentially
>> > > > > >> bug-introducing change, because we'll have to make sure every
>> > > platform
>> > > > > can
>> > > > > >> handle these new tags which aren't like the old ones.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> All of this led to my original proposal: add a new top-level
>> tag,
>> > > > > >> <plugins>, whose children are exactly one <plugin id="..."
>> > > > > version="..." />
>> > > > > >> for every plugin installed on this platform. We would then have
>> > two
>> > > > > >> separate lists in config.xml, but they are listing different
>> > things
>> > > > > (bridge
>> > > > > >> mappings vs. plugins) for different purposes. Since this is an
>> > > > addition,
>> > > > > >> the platforms that don't support the new tag will just ignore it
>> > > > safely.
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> I realize that the top-level <plugins> tag is something we had
>> > > > > previously,
>> > > > > >> before moving to the W3C <widget> spec's <feature> tags instead.
>> > I'm
>> > > > > >> perfectly willing to change the name, to perhaps
>> > > <installed-plugins>,
>> > > > to
>> > > > > >> avoid any confusion with the old <plugins> tag. Any better
>> > > suggestions
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > >> the names?
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> Braden
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> > Didn't recommend anything. Just seeing how the impact is.
>> Didn't
>> > > > > think of
>> > > > > >> > the native bits (the native code that has some js that they
>> call
>> > > > into)
>> > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Jesse <
>> purplecabbage@gmail.com
>> > >
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > > Currently installing the plugin org.apache.cordova.device
>> will
>> > > > add a
>> > > > > >> > > different feature tag for each platform/project's
>> config.xml.
>> > > > > >> > > <!-- firefoxos -->
>> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device">
>> > > > > >> > > <param name="firefoxos-package" value="Device" />
>> > > > > >> > > </feature>
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > <!-- android -->
>> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device" >
>> > > > > >> > > <param name="android-package"
>> > > > > >> value="org.apache.cordova.device.Device"/>
>> > > > > >> > > </feature>
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > <!-- ios -->
>> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device">
>> > > > > >> > > <param name="ios-package" value="CDVDevice"/>
>> > > > > >> > > </feature>
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > <!-- blackberry -->
>> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device" value="Device"/>
>> > > > > >> > > <!-- wp7 and wp8 -->
>> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device">
>> > > > > >> > > <param name="wp-package" value="Device"/>
>> > > > > >> > > </feature>
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > Also, presumably, the following can be used on ALL without
>> > > > conflict:
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device" value="Device">
>> > > > > >> > > <param name="firefoxos-package" value="Device" />
>> > > > > >> > > <param name="android-package"
>> > > > > >> value="org.apache.cordova.device.Device"/>
>> > > > > >> > > <param name="ios-package" value="CDVDevice"/>
>> > > > > >> > > <param name="wp-package" value="Device"/>
>> > > > > >> > > </feature>
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > It would be nice if blackberry supported the
>> > feature/param@name
>> > > > > >> > > ='bb-package'
>> > > > > >> > > but I don't think this is imperative.
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > We are missing a couple points from Braden:
>> > > > > >> > > a) js only plugins do not have config.xml entries
>> > > > > >> > > b) one plugin may add multiple features ( not sure if this
>> has
>> > > > ever
>> > > > > >> > > happened in practice, it may be easier to just force the
>> > plugin
>> > > > > >> developer
>> > > > > >> > > to make their class have a single point of contact in the
>> > > features
>> > > > > >> list,
>> > > > > >> > > and delegate in their own code. )
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > Shaz's recommendations break everything everywhere from
>> what I
>> > > can
>> > > > > >> tell.
>> > > > > >> > > This would require changes to all existing plugins, AND all
>> > > > platform
>> > > > > >> > > bridges native bits, and cordova-js. I don't think we want
>> to
>> > be
>> > > > > this
>> > > > > >> > > destructive.
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > @purplecabbage
>> > > > > >> > > risingj.com
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > > Let's see the impact of using ID as name
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > 1. plugin.xml feature tag, name attribute -> change the
>> > value
>> > > to
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > plugin
>> > > > > >> > > > id. Or just remove the attribute, plugman can inject the
>> > > plugin
>> > > > id
>> > > > > >> > > > automatically(?) so it is less error-prone - not sure
>> > > > > >> > > > 2. plugin's js -> change all service names to ID in
>> > > cordova.exec
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > For user upgrades, they would remove the old plugin, then
>> > add
>> > > > the
>> > > > > new
>> > > > > >> > > one -
>> > > > > >> > > > so it's relatively painless I think.
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > so would it be insane to deprecate the name thing and
>> just
>> > > go
>> > > > > ID?
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > (Warning: I am insane.)
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Shazron Abdullah <
>> > > > > shaz@adobe.com>
>> > > > > >> > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > Brian: plugin mapping "service js name" -> "service
>> > native
>> > > > > >> > > name/class"
>> > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > On 11/13/13 2:36 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <b@brian.io>
>> wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >what are we using <feature> for?
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Braden Shepherdson
>> > > > > >> > > > > > ><braden@google.com>wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> My concern with (ab)using feature tags for this is
>> > that
>> > > > now
>> > > > > >> > > > platforms
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>that
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> don't know about these parameters, and especially
>> > about
>> > > > the
>> > > > > >> > dummy
>> > > > > >> > > > ones
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>for
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> js-only plugins, have a bug, rather than a missing
>> > > > feature.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Nov 13, 2013 4:40 PM, "Gorkem Ercan" <
>> > > > > >> gorkem.ercan@gmail.com
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > If a plugin does not inject a feature tag for
>> some
>> > > > > reason it
>> > > > > >> > is
>> > > > > >> > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>same
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > deal as before. Plugman injects one with the id
>> and
>> > > > > version
>> > > > > >> as
>> > > > > >> > > > > params.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > If a plugin has multiple feature tags since they
>> > will
>> > > > > have
>> > > > > >> the
>> > > > > >> > > > same
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> plugin
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > id and version you will still be able to
>> introspect
>> > > the
>> > > > > >> plugin
>> > > > > >> > > id
>> > > > > >> > > > > and
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > version.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > And apparently adobe sf just had a coffee
>> break...
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > --
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Gorkem
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Braden
>> Shepherdson
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >><braden@chromium.org
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I'm open to changing the names to something
>> else,
>> > > > > since I
>> > > > > >> > > > realize
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>there
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > used to be a <plugins> tag and <plugin> tags
>> > > inside,
>> > > > > >> before
>> > > > > >> > we
>> > > > > >> > > > > used
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > <feature>.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Adding these as parameters on the <feature>
>> tags
>> > is
>> > > > not
>> > > > > >> > > enough,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>because
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > <feature> tags correspond to "names the bridge
>> > > knows
>> > > > > >> about",
>> > > > > >> > > > which
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>is
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > quite "plugins". JS-only plugins don't appear
>> > here,
>> > > > > and a
>> > > > > >> > > single
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>plugin
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > can
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > have multiple bridge names pointing at
>> different
>> > > > > classes.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Braden
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Gorkem Ercan
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >><gorkem.ercan@gmail.com
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > It is unfortunate that the name attribute on
>> > the
>> > > > > feature
>> > > > > >> > tag
>> > > > > >> > > > is
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > plugin id but a name. The uniqueness of the
>> > name
>> > > is
>> > > > > not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>guaranteed by
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > plugman so I can imagine this causing
>> problems
>> > in
>> > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > future.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I can see the need for the tag but I am not
>> > sure
>> > > id
>> > > > > >> > <plugin>
>> > > > > >> > > > tag
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>is
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > correct approach. There are plugins out there
>> > > that
>> > > > > are
>> > > > > >> > still
>> > > > > >> > > > > using
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> that
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > tag
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > for instance [1] is from barcode scanner
>> plugin
>> > > > from
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>registry. As
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > an
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > alternate, <feature> tag can be used and id
>> and
>> > > > > version
>> > > > > >> > info
>> > > > > >> > > > can
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>be
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > injected as additional <param> tags by
>> plugman.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > [1]   <config-file
>> target="res/xml/plugins.xml"
>> > > > > >> > > > > parent="/plugins">
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >             <plugin name="BarcodeScanner"
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > value="com.phonegap.plugins.barcodescanner.BarcodeScanner"/>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >         </config-file>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > --
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Gorkem
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Braden
>> > > > Shepherdson <
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > braden@chromium.org
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > The <feature> tags list only those plugins
>> > > which
>> > > > > are
>> > > > > >> > > > relevant
>> > > > > >> > > > > to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > bridge. Also they map from exec bridge name
>> > to
>> > > > > native
>> > > > > >> > code
>> > > > > >> > > > > class
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > name,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > and
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > have no information about which plugin
>> > they're
>> > > > > from,
>> > > > > >> or
>> > > > > >> > > that
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> plugin's
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > id
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > or
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > version.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > As to multiple platforms, there are several
>> > > > reasons
>> > > > > >> why
>> > > > > >> > > I'm
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> unlikely
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > add
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > this feature to platforms other than iOS or
>> > > > > Android.
>> > > > > >> > > First,
>> > > > > >> > > > > I'm
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > set
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > up
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > for development on any of the others. This
>> is
>> > > > > >> especially
>> > > > > >> > > > true
>> > > > > >> > > > > of
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > ones
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > that can't be built on Mac, especially
>> > Windows
>> > > > > >> (Phone).
>> > > > > >> > > > > Second,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>I
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > don't
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > know anything about developing on those
>> > > > platforms:
>> > > > > I
>> > > > > >> > don't
>> > > > > >> > > > > know
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > libraries or tools (or C# for Windows et
>> al).
>> > > > > Third,
>> > > > > >> > what
>> > > > > >> > > > I'm
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > ultimately
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > working on is getting the App Harness
>> working
>> > > > > nicely
>> > > > > >> as
>> > > > > >> > a
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>launcher
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > and
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > testbed for mobile Chrome apps, which only
>> > > > support
>> > > > > iOS
>> > > > > >> > and
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>Android
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > anyway.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I agree the platforms should strive for
>> > > > > consistency,
>> > > > > >> but
>> > > > > >> > > any
>> > > > > >> > > > > new
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > features
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > have to start somewhere. This is a pretty
>> > > > > >> > straightforward
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > implementation,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > and with my work on Android and iOS as a
>> > > > > reference, it
>> > > > > >> > > > should
>> > > > > >> > > > > be
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > quick
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > add to other platforms.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Braden
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Jesse <
>> > > > > >> > > > > purplecabbage@gmail.com
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Adding this to iOS and Android only is
>> kind
>> > > of
>> > > > > mean.
>> > > > > >> > >  What
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>ends
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> up
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > happening is the high profile platforms
>> > (ie.
>> > > > the
>> > > > > >> ones
>> > > > > >> > > that
>> > > > > >> > > > > get
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> ALL
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > attention) get a new feature and the
>> others
>> > > > > 'appear'
>> > > > > >> > to
>> > > > > >> > > be
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> behind.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >  I
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > think
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > we should focus on remaining consistent
>> to
>> > > some
>> > > > > >> > degree,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>otherwise
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > you
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > end
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > up just making more work for the other
>> > > platform
>> > > > > >> > > > developers.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > This does not seem like it would be hard
>> > for
>> > > > you
>> > > > > to
>> > > > > >> > > > > implement
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>on
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > windows
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > phone and blackberry as well, and having
>> > you
>> > > > > spend a
>> > > > > >> > few
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>minutes
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> in
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > those
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > platforms would probably be a good thing
>> > > > anyway.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I too am also not sure why the existing
>> > > feature
>> > > > > tag
>> > > > > >> in
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>config.xml
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > is
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > not
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > enough.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > @purplecabbage
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > risingj.com
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Gorkem
>> > > Ercan
>> > > > <
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > gorkem.ercan@gmail.com
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hey Braden,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Why is not the current <feature> tags
>> > > > > sufficient
>> > > > > >> for
>> > > > > >> > > > this?
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > --
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Gorkem
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Braden
>> > > > > >> Shepherdson
>> > > > > >> > <
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > braden@chromium.org
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >wrote:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hey folks,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > We've been kicking around the idea of
>> > > > > getting at
>> > > > > >> > > which
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > plugins/versions
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > are
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > installed, at runtime. In order to
>> make
>> > > > that
>> > > > > >> > happen,
>> > > > > >> > > > > I've
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> taken
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > first
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > step of having plugman prepare
>> insert a
>> > > tag
>> > > > > into
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>config.xml
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> for
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > each
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > plugin. It will look like this:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > <plugins>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >   <plugin
>> id="org.apache.cordova.file"
>> > > > > >> > > version="0.2.5"
>> > > > > >> > > > > />
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >   <plugin
>> > > > > id="org.apache.cordova.file-transfer"
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> version="0.3.4"
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > />
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > </plugins>
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > NB that Plugman is injecting this
>> > > > > automatically,
>> > > > > >> > and
>> > > > > >> > > > > this
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>tag
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > should
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > NOT
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > appear in the plugin.xml's
>> > <config-file>
>> > > > > tags.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Now I'll be adding logic to the
>> > > config.xml
>> > > > > >> parser
>> > > > > >> > on
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>Android
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > and
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > iOS,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > but
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > other platform maintainers will have
>> to
>> > > > step
>> > > > > in
>> > > > > >> > for
>> > > > > >> > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>other
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > platforms.
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Tracking the progress here:
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-5379
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > (If you're wondering why we have
>> > > motivation
>> > > > > for
>> > > > > >> > > this,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>it's to
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > make
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > AppHarness more informative, and more
>> > > > > robust, by
>> > > > > >> > > > warning
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>the
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > user
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > when
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > an
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > app they've installed is looking for
>> > > > plugins
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > >> > > > harness
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> can't
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > provide,
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > or
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > where versions mismatch.)
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Braden
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > > >
>> > > > > >> > > >
>> > > > > >> > >
>> > > > > >> >
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>

Mime
View raw message