Yep, my biggest concern is that we are able to use CLI but still work against master. I think braden's ask covers that though.
What good is working offline if you have no plugins? Are you suggesting that we also include some set of plugins inside of cordova-cli? On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > It big. Certainly would be more efficient to lazy load, and cache so > offline works. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Gord Tanner <gtan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > There was some issues over download size for our cli, any idea what the > size of all the platforms are? > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > On 2013-03-22, at 1:42 PM, Braden Shepherdson <bra...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > > >> I'm content to have the vendoring, it has some advantages as you wrote. > >> > >> However, I would also very much like to add a platform that's running > from > >> somewhere on my local disk, as I described in my feature request in the > doc. > >> > >> So I propose a flag like cordova platform add android > >> --target=../../cordova-android where that local directory can have > >> whatever locally patched code I want. > >> > >> Braden > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > >> > >>> Right now we put the release of Cordova into the npm package for > >>> cordova-cli and we version lock the two. (Codova/CLI 2.5.x === > >>> Cordova/Platform 2.5.latest). > >>> > >>> We did this because: > >>> > >>> - has to work offline > >>> - cannot have a Git dep to do development > >>> - issue tracking locked to the real version of Cordova > >>> > >>> We can solve all these issues. The code to do that isn't really a huge > >>> deal. But to add it we gain very little that isn't already achieved by > >>> vendoring. I'd like for us to be aware the current can be improved but > >>> its low priority compared to, say, ripple and plugin integration. > >>> >
