Who's four-command proposal is it? Anis' or Andrew's? On 3/21/13 3:14 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <b...@brian.io> wrote:
>I think we can have our cake and eat it too. We should have four high >level commands. Those commands can shell to lower level discreetly >testable commands. The end user will never know the difference. The >developers win the tight abstraction we seek. > >Make sense? > >On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:55 PM, Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Michael Brooks >><mich...@michaelbrooks.ca>wrote: >> >>> +1 Fil's outlined design. >>> >>> I'm still not convinced of what Anis and Andrew are in favour of. >>>Having >>> each script do more will make it more difficult for common results >>>across >>> all platforms. >>> >>> I really like Anis's suggestion of just four scripts. What's the >>>motivation >>> > for having many scripts? Having fewer will dramatically reduce copy & >>> paste >>> > bugs. It will also aid discoverability (since you'll get --help >>>instead >>> of >>> > just "ls" and infer from the name what they do). >>> >>> >>> The motivation for having many scripts is that there is a single entry >>> point for a single action. Each action is discrete. Either a platform >>> supports `deploy-emulator` or doesn't. If we have a single `run` >>> entry-point, it becomes confusing whether a platform supports all >>> requirements of the `run` action. >>> >>> I feel the code repetition is also a weak argument. We are defining >>> entry-point scripts. You can refactor out the common routines (e.g. >>>build) >>> into a helper script that can be invoked by multiple scripts. As far >>>as I >>> know, this is possible in bash, batch, and Windows Script Hosting. >>> >> >> I guess this topic will need a vote to follow the Apache Way. We've been >> talking about/implementing/changing these scripts for a long time and we >> can't seem to come to a complete agreement. >> >> >>> >>> ripple should be a separate option and not a separate command in my >>> > opinion. To simplify things and if everyone agrees we can ignore the >>> `run` >>> > command flow above and launch ripple by default and ask users to >>>specify >>> > options if they want to deploy and run to a particular >>>device/emulator. >>> >>> >>> I feel Ripple has no place in the platform-specific scripts. I love >>>Ripple, >>> but Ripple belongs is a higher-level tool such as Cordova CLI. The >>> platform-specific scripts are meant to deal with platform-specific >>> functions. >>> >> >> I don't have a strong opinion on this. So I could agree with you that >>this >> Ripple could be a higher-level tool. >> >> >>> >>> Michael >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 8:22 PM, Benn Mapes <benn.ma...@gmail.com> >>>wrote: >>> >>> > I liked the idea you mentioned earlier with having one wrapper >>>script, >>> > that way there is one entry point for the given commands for the >>>needed >>> > functionality. Then it doesn't matter what underlying scripts >>>actually do >>> > the work. >>> > >>> > Then our only focus would be on the commands and not so much the >>>name of >>> > the scripts. >>> > >>> > >>> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 7:36 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > I really like Anis's suggestion of just four scripts. What's the >>> > motivation >>> > > for having many scripts? Having fewer will dramatically reduce >>>copy & >>> > paste >>> > > bugs. It will also aid discoverability (since you'll get --help >>>instead >>> > of >>> > > just "ls" and infer from the name what they do). >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > > Ya ya ya we're all on agreement on this specific issue. The >>> underlying >>> > > > platform scripts can be used regardless of whether you're using >>> > > > cordova-cli or not. >>> > > > >>> > > > On 3/20/13 3:51 PM, "Anis KADRI" <anis.ka...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > >On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Benn Mapes >>><benn.ma...@gmail.com> >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > >> I know that sounds >>> > > > >> like a lot >>> > > > >> of scripts but we're building them for the cordova-cli to use, >>> so i >>> > > > >>like >>> > > > >> the idea of breaking >>> > > > >> them out so each script does a *very specific* task with as >>> > > > >>little-to-no >>> > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > >No we're not. cordova-cli is a cool tool that people can use >>>but it >>> > > should >>> > > > >not be the only way of building Cordova apps in my opinion. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>>
