cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Deprecation of Config and the embedded use case (4.0.x related)
Date Tue, 17 Mar 2015 00:58:48 GMT
I just want to add that Joe is not alone on thinking that are developers
with this use case.
For us we have customers that start with Native Android alone, and then
later want to add a Cordova Web View to a portion of their App.
And they want an easy way to add a Cordova Web View.
For 4.x, I would assume that the developer can choose to make this embedded
Cordova Web View CrossWalk based.


On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:

> That's why we have tests! I just changed the activity and saw that we have
> one failure.  I'm not sure why this test in particular is failing, since
> there's too many assertions in one method, so I'll have to try and debug it
> today.
>
> The thing is that if we're deprecating something and replacing it with
> something else, we should write tests for it.  Releasing a 4.0.x and
> changing how we embed a WebView by changing class names but not fixing up
> the deprecation is bizzare.
>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 7:15 AM Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I wanted to make sure that I didn't break the old way of doing things.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The main issue is that this isn't documented anywhere, and this is
> > > necessary for people to use a Third Party WebView.  Also, why didn't
> you
> > > bother updating the test with the new API?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 5:19 PM Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here's an example:
> > > >
> > > > ConfigXmlParser parser = new ConfigXmlParser();
> > > > parser.parse(activity);
> > > > webView.init(cordova, parser.getPluginEntries(),
> > > parser.getPreferences());
> > > >
> > > > Feel free to iterate if you think the API is too obtuse, but I think
> > it's
> > > > good to allow a file-less mode, and to allow different WebViews to
> have
> > > > different settings.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Do you have an example of how this would work? This seems to be a
> lot
> > > > more
> > > > > complex than it needs to be.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 5:05 PM Andrew Grieve <agrieve@chromium.org
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > It's so that you can have multiple CordovaWebViews that use
> > different
> > > > > > configs within one application. It's also so that you don't
have
> to
> > > > have
> > > > > a
> > > > > > config.xml if you prefer to build up your config in code instead.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't think loadConfig() is deprecated. It has
> > > > > > a @SuppressWarnings("deprecation"), which just silences a warning
> > > > about
> > > > > it
> > > > > > setting the config of the Config class (which is done for
> backwards
> > > > > > compatibility).
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > OK, this actually makes using the WebView as a component
a lot
> > > > harder,
> > > > > > > since you now have to have this loadConfig method which
you
> also
> > > > marked
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > deprecation required to get all of the necessary attributes
out
> > of
> > > > > this.
> > > > > > > I'm pretty sure this is a major step backwards in that
people
> > > looking
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > use Cordova as a component now have to jump through additional
> > > hoops
> > > > to
> > > > > > get
> > > > > > > this to work.  What is the benefit of deprecating the Config
> > static
> > > > > class
> > > > > > > and replacing it with the ConfigXmlParser again? I don't
> remember
> > > why
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > was done.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:04 AM Andrew Grieve <
> > agrieve@chromium.org
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Joe Bowser <
> bowserj@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 7:39 AM Andrew Grieve
<
> > > > agrieve@chromium.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > You can now instantiate a CordovaWebView
without a
> > > config.xml,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > without
> > > > > > > > > > using Config. This happened when I added
an "init()"
> method
> > > to
> > > > > > > > > > CordovaWebView. You can pass in a CordovaPreferences
> > object,
> > > > and
> > > > > a
> > > > > > > list
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > PluginEntry. Maybe we just need a better
comment on
> Config
> > > > saying
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > > > > these instead?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Where does one get this PluginEntry list when
they're
> > > embedding a
> > > > > > > > WebView?
> > > > > > > > > This needs to be documented or at least put in
the test
> that
> > > > tests
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > use
> > > > > > > > > case.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > That has nothing to do with InAppBrowser,
this is to do
> > > with
> > > > > > > > embedding
> > > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > > > > WebView inside an Android application.
I don't think
> you
> > > > > > understand
> > > > > > > > > what
> > > > > > > > > > I
> > > > > > > > > > > mean when I say the embedded use case.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Maybe try explaining a bit more?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Even though you edited the test that explicitly
covers this
> > > use,
> > > > > > case,
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > even though we've talked about using CordovaWebView
as an
> > > Android
> > > > > > View
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > over a year, you need it explained more?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So, not everyone wants to use all of Cordova,
for many
> > reasons.
> > > > > > > Instead,
> > > > > > > > > they really just want to take advantage of the
WebView
> > > component
> > > > in
> > > > > > > their
> > > > > > > > > native apps so that they can create hybrid apps
that are
> > mostly
> > > > > > native
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > > only some parts that use Cordova.  This is where
you would
> > > > declare
> > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > view in your layout XML like this:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > <org.apache.cordova.engine.SystemWebView
> > > > > > > > >             android:id="@+id/WebViewComponent"
> > > > > > > > >             android:layout_width="match_parent"
> > > > > > > > >             android:layout_height="match_parent">
> > > > > > > > > </org.apache.cordova.engine.SystemWebView>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > And then, in the activity start up your view
like this:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >   private CordovaWebView webInterface;
> > > > > > > > >   private CordovaInterfaceImpl systemInterface
= new
> > > > > > > > > CordovaInterfaceImpl(this);
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > //Set up the webview
> > > > > > > > >         SystemWebView webView = (SystemWebView)
> > > > > > > > > findViewById(R.id.WebViewComponent);
> > > > > > > > >         webInterface = new CordovaWebViewImpl(this,
new
> > > > > > > > > SystemWebViewEngine(webView));
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >         Config.init();
> > > > > > > > >         webInterface.init(systemInterface,
> > > > > > Config.getPluginEntries(),
> > > > > > > > > Config.getPreferences());
> > > > > > > > >         webView.loadUrl(Config.getStartUrl());
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Right now, we're getting the configuration from
the Config
> > > class,
> > > > > > > because
> > > > > > > > > we at least have access to this.  If we don't
have this,
> how
> > do
> > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > get
> > > > > > > > > access to the list of plugin entries specified
in
> Config.xml?
> > > > I'm
> > > > > > > pretty
> > > > > > > > > sure we still want to support this feature.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Does that make sense?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I gotcha. So, I think the answer is to use ConfigXmlParser()
> to
> > > > > extract
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > information required by init. You shouldn't need the
call
> > > > > Config.init()
> > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > > all.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>



-- 
Carlos Santana
<csantana23@gmail.com>

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