Ripple can do everything serve does right now and if you don't pass enableRipple as a command arg it will just host your content exactly like serve.
Should we just route the serve command to ripple? On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > I'm fine with removing server. In my mind ripple is just a serve command > on steroids. At this morning's meeting I believe some of the Googlers > expressed concerns about axing out serve, so perhaps a prudent first step > would be to add Ripple as an `emulate` command and then we can take baby > steps to extract out serve over the coming weeks. > > On 3/22/13 2:45 PM, "Gord Tanner" <gtan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >Ripple is now ready to be integrated, currently I have it added as a > >seperate ripple command in a personal branch [1] > > > >Most of the work on Ripple was a much needed feature we knew we needed > >(Device Selection via query string [2]) as well as adding the ability to > >serve content from multiple directories [3] (to support www/ merged with > >platform/www/). > > > >Should I do the full remove serve and add this to emulate or merge this in > >as is? (maybe remove serve in the meantime) > > > >[1] - https://github.com/gtanner/cordova-cli/tree/ripple > >[2] - > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-ripple.git;a=commitdif > >f;h=b36213d426700a3cc62b4701bc75806ff8539528 > >[3] - > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-ripple.git;a=commitdif > >f;h=2e483836bc5a24397ed002556f4209fac9508438 > > > > > >On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > > >> Thats awesome ;) > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Gord Tanner <gtan...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Yeah Michal, > >> > > >> > That is the exact use case I had in mind. When we were a startup we > >> > couldn't afford mac's so just used linux and ripple for all our > >>contract > >> > work and borrowed a friends macbook when we needed to compile. > >> > > >> > > >> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> > > Very interesting. Combined with Bradens proposal to support > >>pointing > >> to > >> > a > >> > > local platform, looks very good. > >> > > > >> > > Also note, offline isn't the only reason, platform support on a > >>given > >> > > machine as well: ie, can "test" iPhone (sorta) on a linux box > >>through > >> > > Ripple. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > omg I just realized this would fulfill offline use case vs lazy > >>load > >> > > > vendoring > >> > > > > >> > > > caching could be a future thing > >> > > > > >> > > > might be a really nice path > >> > > > > >> > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Gord Tanner <gtan...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > +1 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > With this I would want to add the ability to add a platform to a > >> > > project > >> > > > even if we don't have the build dependencies. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Emulate would just default to ripple so is still usable if we > >>can't > >> > > > build/deploy > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On 2013-03-22, at 1:55 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> I think this bleeds back into other discussions. It was > >>mentioned > >> in > >> > > > >> the call earlier. I think some tacit agreement that ./serve > >>goes > >> > away > >> > > > >> and Ripple is the default ./emulate command. But lets discuss. > >> (Just > >> > > > >> this. Lets keep thread focused.) > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >
