To clarify - I don't mind if serve gets axed for now.
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > Like that plan. Say we proceed and land it in 2.6 to feel out. > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 2:50 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.) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >
