Fair enough. If we make this a plugin, then we should deal with the state issue. Let's close the tickets and let the users know.
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> wrote: > Yep, got it working by adding that line to the manifest. My impression is > the same as Simon just said. The stock Camera on 4.2 is really nice, so > taking this away is a bit sad. I understand the motivation behind wanting > this when other stock cameras are buggy though, and there are certainly > many apps out there that have their own cameras in them. So... if we could > make this a plugin, apps that want a custom camera could pull it in and > tweak it to their needs, but I don't think it's the right long-term play. > > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Simon MacDonald > <simon.macdon...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hey Joe, >> >> After delving into this problem for quite some time I have come back around >> and I believe this new "foreground" camera should end up being a plugin >> instead of a core part of the API. We really shouldn't be in the business >> of implementing a Camera app for end users and there is no way we are going >> to make them all happy. I believe we are just opening ourselves up to >> more/different problems by continuing on this route. >> >> Sorry to flip, flop on this issue. >> >> Simon Mac Donald >> http://hi.im/simonmacdonald >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Hey >> > >> > I'm going to resurrect this thread. What do people think of our >> > pre-built camera so far? I still have updated on this branch here: >> > >> > https://github.com/infil00p/cordova-android/tree/camera >> > >> > It'd be good to get more feedback before continuing down this road. >> > The downside so far is having to pass around assets. I wish there was >> > a way around this. Also, feedback on the UI elements would also help. >> > >> > There's still work to be done, but should we hav this as a built-in >> > option for 2.3.0, or should we delay to 2.4.0? It'd be good to get >> > feedback on this now before we continue to move with this. >> > >> > Joe >> > >>
