Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cordova.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cordova.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of mmocny@google.com designates
 209.85.220.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: mmocny@google.com
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAMSbhBgs=a=0RbObiV=tH8OSsJtq6YtU+t5ndoSqNjvp+xgV4w@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CANpVHHx-_myfoSpkOqSRjzYY7nQ_N0HAV66xMr_oUUMDJSKWgQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEeF2TeQMCH1Rqfzg4MevQKTRDw4a3o=cQs5hbdDZLhoSbvM3A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABiQX1UQ+ginHOVdniHCXgP=wnvqP3mWAgmnhmpRGAFMKca7ew@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABiQX1X=sP7RR3pQuvBiY2w3t_A0nf-+EOEL0B87Eor0ShTN5g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANpVHHznJsLJG6UnEyYDh-=8bT3001F2tkCsaVRTm5TSLQibAg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABiQX1VEN_pq++knpHAh3AgQ62ZxRNEQJtS8BaYJC8XT+HyeFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANpVHHwY6Frr1ryAha_7e0b_kmkFgmYCd_wJKP_jghmTLV3r_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+h2+t2Q9EZi59wcw6kg737+CrJ0QESf6HrtCjGyWPPUneWPuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANpVHHy_7HRKnEtfVWbf1rDXdbbLcU8DqtvSxtWBeAjjV7sLgg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEeF2TehW1UugMXrmT71sAU9F+AMPJCS-6LpR5zKDFxPRDxtNg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANpVHHzwCgvoRN1JFDOR_J_fO3C+cKJYZgCp_V=2kt44YOrwTw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+h2+t0s2zFK=Zh6kv8Nh1beOBpbje=n2QXONNw=99QbXXF1ww@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADVgkyOJrCA7x=phng0oSVeC6objpQTi6+-iTfQzSrvrV=OYrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOBL_k6Mv8GPCtjm5Do2aQFQc7fnhQ4Hpn5quXyCSLCm6VpEEg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABiQX1Xr5JDaAR57RbMVQvw43hDNCc-UL3x=3awYZgAvHq8_QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABiQX1XTZMrLe4sK_xO7BaK75=HOPSX4APpaLy0ssq47c4wgXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOBL_k6wK0bzy89LyKDBQiNF2_PZmB8muARLivHgct-t5hax=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABiQX1WZP+HCoxqO7Dh5RjHtsb0foyNdrG3JgLLEzCaaog8xjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOBL_k6ENvWGZY_+6BBHQrmAv+Rs+kB4kH-JEaHJ9adq9w6tGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADVgkyM1POfPpy0WDg+J7uADPOpCjG7bA4V3Xc4DJh0MOTzZdQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHYtTq=AE-43NgE5XUqy+5JPFTewZ4cqcxLQGbHcQBQ8+eC-OA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEeF2Te-+tpc3zuELJTUrb8cQoFENpue=A5FLJnLADdSH83mQQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMSbhBgs=a=0RbObiV=tH8OSsJtq6YtU+t5ndoSqNjvp+xgV4w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Michal Mocny <mmocny@chromium.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 09:25:37 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAEeF2TcCSbRhqfKFX9kzxKg=Wqk+6EvKEui54jrVYXDWF9Zb0w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Browserify JS is in
To: dev <dev@cordova.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b3431a06538db050a4205cc

--047d7b3431a06538db050a4205cc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Thanks Steven.

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 12:15 AM, Steven Gill <stevengill97@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> For the lazy: cordova_plugins.js discussion
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/CB-8153
> On Dec 14, 2014 6:58 PM, "Michal Mocny" <mmocny@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> > Lets discuss the cordova_plugins.js thing elsewhere, this thread has
> forked
> > a lot already.
> >
> > On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Carlos Santana <csantana23@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This is the part that I like the most:
> > > "and start
> > > writing plugins as proper node modules. Maybe even push them to npm and
> > > manage dependencies that way."
> > >
> > > Agree with having less XHR, and concatenate cordova + plugins.
> > > Not in love with cordova_plugins.js to know what plugins are included
> in
> > > the app, would prefer to see a package.json with all software that was
> > use
> > > to build the app, and maybe one day could a be a real valid
> pacakge.json
> > > that can be use to pull down dependencies.
> > >
> > > The same way we depend on npm, elementree, and dozen more npm modules
> > that
> > > our platforms and cli depend on, we don't distribute browserfy will be
> > just
> > > another one.
> > > One thing I will consider with browserfy if there is a any code coming
> > from
> > > browserfy like the bootstrap code that contains the require function,
> > then
> > > maybe only this code get's legally review as it going to be part of the
> > App
> > > that developer builds with cordova.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Brian LeRoux <b@brian.io> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > yeah we are *not* proposing to distribute browserify or its deps
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > What are we actually distributing?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri Dec 12 2014 at 12:36:03 PM Andrew Grieve <
> > agrieve@chromium.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri Dec 12 2014 at 10:25:51 AM Andrew Grieve <
> > > > agrieve@chromium.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm not actually worried about my disk filling up.
> Dependencies
> > > > must
> > > > > be
> > > > > > > > vetted for appropriate licenses, so now there's more overhead
> > > here.
> > > > > If
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > > > need to make a change to the module system now we need to
> poor
> > > > > through
> > > > > > > docs
> > > > > > > > and make PRs instead of just editing our very small
> code-base.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This mix of MIT and 3-Clause BSD looks compatible to me.  It's
> > > weaker
> > > > > > than
> > > > > > > Apache, but not incompatible.  Do we really need to send this
> to
> > > > legal?
> > > > > > >
> https://github.com/substack/node-browserify/blob/master/LICENSE
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are people who can argue your other points better, but
> > saying
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > the license is the overhead when you can find it in the repo?
> > I'm
> > > > not
> > > > > > sure
> > > > > > > how we would have gotten this far if we had to check with legal
> > for
> > > > > every
> > > > > > > single dependency.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I meant that it depends on a bunch of other modules. Run
> > > > license-checker
> > > > > on
> > > > > > browserify and you get: http://pastebin.com/XDMCTRRb
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Carlos Santana
> > > <csantana23@gmail.com>
> > >
> >
>

--047d7b3431a06538db050a4205cc--