cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Bowser <>
Subject Re: Question About Official Plugins
Date Mon, 28 Jul 2014 20:57:15 GMT
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Peter Metz <> wrote:

> Hello Cordova Devs,
> I wrote a Cordova plugin
> <> which kind of
> accidentally ended up with an official-like plugin ID:
> org.apache.cordova.ibeacon.
> I know that's lame, and would like to state that I didn't intend to
> infringe any copyrights and if instructed so, will change plugin ID, no
> questions asked.
Cool.  I was working on something similar, but I wouldn't want this to be
in the Cordova project, because of the whole Apple/iBeacon thing.

> But before all that, please, read on!
> I've been advised
> <>, that
> because of the fake-official ID, it is not possible to submit the plugin to
> Phonegap Build which I never use, but would not want to leave out people
> who do, for obvious reasons.
> Is there even, tiny bit of chance that my plugin could become an official
> one (so it can be present on Phonegap Build), while I'm still able to
> commit changes to it?

I'm going to say no here.  The reason we won't add this to the project as
an official plugin is because:

1. I'm not sure of the legal status of iBeacon
2. I'm not sure of the legal status of using iBeacon on Android.  I know
Radius Networks did an API for it, and they still exist.
3. I have no idea if BLE exists outside of Android and iOS
4. I like to have people have control over their cool stuff outside the
project proper for as long as possible.  Once it becomes an official
plugin, it becomes part of the ASF project, and all the rules regarding
releases apply.  Right now, you own it and you can release it as much as
you want.  Sure, you take more legal risks, but you can release earlier and
more often than we can, without a vote.

There are both positives and negatives to making plugins core, and I
honestly think that the answer at this time is no for this one.  This has
nothing to do with the code or the utility, but instead is more about
whether it's a right fit right now.

Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?


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