Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cordova-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cordova-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 594B7111A8 for ; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 22:22:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 36238 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jul 2014 22:22:46 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cordova-dev-archive@cordova.apache.org Received: (qmail 36201 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jul 2014 22:22:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cordova.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cordova.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cordova.apache.org Received: (qmail 36190 invoked by uid 99); 29 Jul 2014 22:22:45 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 22:22:45 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of peter.metz@unarin.com designates 209.85.223.178 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.223.178] (HELO mail-ie0-f178.google.com) (209.85.223.178) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 22:22:44 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id rd18so348797iec.37 for ; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 15:22:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=o5HjOerUC1x+1Fkz1/lpPrkxrDlRynvrA+SoL6ZnrDs=; b=nHXjX/mkaFHOHLLepAIbC+EJ+zIdO2Nnm8j+0g6AQnX1+6f4uxP7LaiIeFVcNLA3C8 d+qxEyFa0qFpPnfUvCEj+6ceyFVqf8R9vAiSRDq3hTmIb0WRHRAdSxy1iIsT8//QZm/w NI03+4j7wb7ELMV86X36/AWDletPPigC8oygVGfyCjsMfl1oxO/WZVIoiFSGP7AUHsYk wGOkWpIkQH/NvRIXfMAoDoRsx3oE3mIivaoD+D0Y71KbX7rHCwA5zkwbi4SuWg0kikmw 3iOcghAgfxirJt2Dn2u3jbKpcioEQJv8FwbCDb2tiYEDAu7CkEdropKHPC6sLMAhvJhp X0FA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl9CxA+dcU6T8+dbW9pj54i4Fq9qOM/Tbvuw0KfFDFIINg9zzddhSp3g2SSCFVuVUE90/PN MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.61.148 with SMTP id p20mr40099508igr.44.1406672538720; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 15:22:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.108.167 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Jul 2014 15:22:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 23:22:18 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Question About Official Plugins From: Peter Metz To: dev@cordova.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdca44cfc726104ff5c785f X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7bdca44cfc726104ff5c785f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Carlos, Jesse and Joe, Thank you guys, loads of helpful info! I will go with the renaming as suggested and it seems like even from the user side it won't be as painful as I anticipated, so thanks for the additional info. Losing control over the releases and contributions is indeed a bit of a pain point so I'll put the idea on ice as I have very decent people to help with contributions and testing as well anyways. Kind regards, Peter On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 2:24 AM, Carlos Santana wrote: > Peter > Thanks for contacting the Cordova mailing list and share with us your > project, we are excited when user's use Cordova and even more excited when > users build Cordova plugins to share with others. > > Like Jesse said since the plugin is not register on the Cordova registry > [1] there is no harm today that you name it with org.apache.codova.* > There are plugins available in phonegap build [2] that do not have the > apache identifier like Barcodescanner[3] > > [1] http://plugins.cordova.io > [1] https://build.phonegap.com/plugins > [2] com.phonegap.plugins.barcodescanner > > Since the user's of your plugin are not installing via id, and the current > way to upgrade a plugin is to remove and then add the plugin, your users > will not be that affected on the change in the identifier, just need to use > 'plugin ls' to double check the id to use to rm the plugin > > [cordova | phonegap local] plugin rm [org.apache.cordova.ibeacon | > com.petermetz.cordova.ble] > > When you decide to publish your plugin on the registry [1], you will not be > allowed so the sooner you change the id, the less users affected. > > Also like Joe said, having the plugin outside ASF gives your more control > over your project, and it's great that is open source with a Apache 2.0 > license and that you accept contributions either bug reports or pull > requests. > > PS: it's rad that you are using dart to test cordova cli > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Joe Bowser wrote: > > > 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? > > > > Joe > > > > > > -- > Carlos Santana > > --047d7bdca44cfc726104ff5c785f--