incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shazron <>
Subject Re: endless refactoring of plugins until "Cordova 2.x"
Date Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:31:23 GMT
I haven't done any JavaScript shims but I've eased the pain for users
needing to use plugins by adding compatibility headers for all the
PhoneGap/Cordova versions out there (0.96 to 1.5.0). See my plugin in
this issue and its README:

These compat. headers I include in CordovaLib but is so far
undocumented. What the procedure is, you would write a plugin meant
for 1.6.0 (ie the latest version), and for older version support, a
dev would included the appropriate compatibility headers.

It's working great so far for the CDVLocalStorage plugin - from the
same plugin code base (one .m and .h) through the compat. headers,
everything just works with older versions as well. I assume we can do
something similar for JavaScript as well (shims).


On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Bryce Curtis <> wrote:
> I agree that there's no way to know what plugins will look like in 2.x.
>  Until then, I strongly believe we need to maintain the same (undocumented)
> API that plugins currently rely upon, with the goal that 3rd party plugins
> won't need to be updated again until 2.x - They already took a hit with
> renaming in 1.5.
> Regarding the plugin APIs (JS & native), we can't identify with certainty
> which ones will be deprecated until we are further along with the 2.x
> plugin architecture, so we shouldn't confuse users until details are worked
> out and prototypes running.  Regarding API stability, while we have
> discussed deprecating methods like addConstructor, window.plugins, etc.,
>  the fact that they have remained consistent for many releases (well over a
> year or 2) has led to their wide use.
> After 1.6.0 release, we should schedule a plugin meeting to go over the
> priorities, what's been done to date, and where it's going.
> On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Filip Maj <> wrote:
>> Thanks Brian, I was just going to respond saying the same thing but you
>> beat me to it!
>> >What I'm trying to say is that I'm not at all inclined to +1/-1 until
>> >we have agreed on the particulars of the change we seek.
>> ^^ The above is the underlying issue. I suggest we do that as a first step.
>> The referenced bug in this thread is just a small part of the overall
>> work. Side note: deprecating + removing the "PhoneGap" JS global is not
>> necessarily for plugins, it's a part of the Apache rename. The only
>> changing part of the bug is removal of window.plugins. I prototyped a
>> deprecation approach in a branch here (diff view):
>> Re: addResource/hasResource. These do not exist in cordova-js right now.
>> They are effectively gone. They were only there for BB + Android anyways.
>> I had one dude on IRC complain that we removed that in 1.5.0 without first
>> deprecating. No huge outcry. Not saying that the fact we just axed it is
>> good - it wasn't. We should have deprecated first, no doubt. My point
>> about these two specific methods is, it already happened last release, so
>> it is a moot point to discuss.
>> Additionally we have had some work done to try to prototype what a final
>> plugins-based approach to app development would look like, specifically
>> Andrew Lunny's "pluginstall" work (which I believe started from a
>> thread/discussion that happened on the list between Andrew and Pat). Here:
>> Andrew is most of the way there in terms of defining an XML file
>> describing the integration of native source for a plugin, see:
>> The native plugin architecture has been around for a while. It is stable.
>> Not much needs to be done there.
>> The biggest question in my mind is how we want to handle the JavaScript.
>> With cordova-js already implementing a basic module system with a hard API
>> for the exec() function, we're actually not too far away.
>> We should keep going in enumerating all these things that make up the
>> plugin goal in this thread and drop whatever else comes up into a wiki
>> page.
>> It seems like it is a "safer" idea to slate all the plugin changes / API
>> removals for 2.0. That being said, can we agree to drop deprecation
>> notices into the agreed-upon APIs that will be axed leading up to 2.0?
>> > I think we
>> >can agree on the spirit of the focus of the work being a world of
>> >plugins and tooling for automation. We haven't added much outside of
>> >battery (and a new platform).
>> >
>> >1. The plugin architecture remains completely undocumented.
>> >2. We do not support 3rd party plugins.
>> >3. There is no automation or tooling.
>> >
>> >Are plugins from an API standpoint stable today?  (I'm guessing not
>> >when I think of things like addConstructor.)
>> >
>> >If they aren't stable, undocumented, unsupported by our effort, and a
>> >work in progress for tooling: why are we concerned with breaking them?
>> >
>> >(Take all above with grain of salt, I think having a 2.x branch a good
>> >idea, but will slow us down for no direct benefit to Cordova that I
>> >can currently see.)

View raw message