If there is any chance of mutual exclusivity, an error should be raised. Otherwise the user has no idea which one happened. For building, I could see doing both the debug and release version. But for deploying/running, I would argue the intent is for only one at a time? (At least to me.)
___________________________________ Kerri Shotts photoKandy Studios, LLC On the Web: http://www.photokandy.com/ Social Media: Twitter: @photokandy, http://twitter.com/photokandy Tumblr: http://photokandy.tumblr.com/ Github: https://github.com/kerrishotts https://github.com/organizations/photokandyStudios CoderWall: https://coderwall.com/kerrishotts Apps on the Apple Store: https://itunes.apple.com/us/artist/photokandy-studios-llc/id498577828 Books: http://www.packtpub.com/phonegap-2-mobile-application-hotshot/book http://www.packtpub.com/phonegap-social-app-development/book On Tuesday, April 9, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Anis KADRI wrote: > Or it can just fail and ask users to build with the appropriate flag first. > I mean that is if we're following the 'one script does only one thing' idea. > > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Michael Brooks <mich...@michaelbrooks.ca > (mailto:mich...@michaelbrooks.ca)>wrote: > > > > > > > Augh! This actually made it past the mailing list. :( > > > > ... > > > > > +1 for the dislike :P but users will tell us if they like having 12 > > scripts > > > laying around. > > > > > > > > They are only assigned issues. If you guys have concerns, bring them up. > > There is little point in committing to work if it isn't valuable to our > > users. > > > > On that note, Benn and I noticed a recent issue with the `run` command. > > Since `run` will implicitly build an application, it must accept the build > > mode flag `--debug` or `--release`. In other words, it should accept all > > parameters that `build` accepts and forward the valid ones to the `build` > > command. This should be true for any high-level command. > > > > Anyone have input on the `run` command? Once settled, we'll update the Wiki > > and issue details. > > > > Michael > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com > > (mailto:anis.ka...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > > > > +1 for the dislike :P but users will tell us if they like having 12 > > scripts > > > laying around. > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com > > > (mailto:bows...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > > > > > > Augh! This actually made it past the mailing list. :( > > > > > > > > I hate this idea for the emulators and devices, because this is a set > > > > of extremely complex script that has next to zero payoff for our > > > > users. I really wish I paid more attention to this thread earlier on, > > > > because I really don't like these scripts. I guess it's too late to > > > > vote a -1 against these, and I guess it's my fault for ignoring things > > > > I really dislike. > > > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com > > > > (mailto:f...@adobe.com)> wrote: > > > > > FYI issues for all of these scripts have been filed. > > > > > > > > > > On 3/28/13 1:31 PM, "Michael Brooks" <mich...@michaelbrooks.ca > > > > > (mailto:mich...@michaelbrooks.ca)> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Fil, great work on the wiki document. Below are some feedback > > > > > > points. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > `build` > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > What happens when a user specifies both --debug and --release? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm happy as long as we decide on what happens. For the sake of > > ease, I > > > > > > think it would be better to just fail. > > > > > > > > > > > > This brings up the question of exit codes. I don't want to over > > > engineer, > > > > > > but should we distinguish between an exit code for an "unsupported > > > > > > command" > > > > > > and "runtime command error" (e.g. unsupported argument combination)? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As > > > > > > long as there is a message with the exit code, it's not necessary > > > > > > but > > > > > > could > > > > > > provide a good hint to higher-level tools. > > > > > > > > > > > > `run [--target=<id>]` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I like the term `run` and how it will implicitly invokes `build` > > > > > > when > > > > > > necessary. This will be the go-to command for most developers. > > > > > > > > > > > > `list-emulator-images` > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > `list-started-emulators` > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > `list-devices` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The listing format is: "ID: DESCRIPTION". What will it look like > > > > > > when > > > no > > > > > > description is provided? "ID" or "ID:"? > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it possible to remove the colon entirely and delimit on a space? > > "ID > > > > > > DESCRIPTION" and "ID" > > > > > > > > > > > > `deploy-emulator` > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > `deploy-device` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Deploy is a confusing term because it's too similar to "run." Even > > both > > > > > > command definitions use the term "deploy." > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd like to propose renaming the deploy commands to: > > `install-emulator` > > > > > > and > > > > > > `install-device`. > > > > > > > > > > > > Install more clearly describes the action and implies that it does > > not > > > > > > implicitly build first. > > > > > > > > > > > > Again, awesome work Fil! > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com > > > > > > (mailto:f...@adobe.com)> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Shaz, updated the wiki article. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/26/13 4:07 PM, "Shazron" <shaz...@gmail.com > > > > > > > (mailto:shaz...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * log is only the Simulator > > > > > > > > * build release/debug -- last one clobbers? depending on how the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > parsing > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > implemented > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com > > > > > > > > (mailto:f...@adobe.com)> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK, I've done some rehash of the proposal and put it up on the > > > wiki: > > > > > > > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CommandLineToolingDesign > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please take a look and post back if you have questions, > > > > disagreement, > > > > > > > > > want > > > > > > > > > to +1 it, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At the top there is a generic multi-device flow that can > > > > > > > > > solve a > > > lot > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > > > the consistency issues we've seen before. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Assuming this proposal is on track, there are three > > > > > > > > > outstanding > > > > > > > > > questions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Two for the `log` command: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * Does the current iOS implementation only work for simulator, > > or > > > > > > > > > device, > > > > > > > > > or either, or neither? > > > > > > > > > * Does the multi-device flow apply correctly to the log case? > > > > > > > > > It > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > seems > > > > > > > > > identifying whether the user's Cordova application is running > > > > > > > > > on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > an > > > > > > > > > emulator or device target would need to be figured out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One about the build command: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > * What happens when a user specifies both --release and > > > > > > > > > --debug, > > > > I.e. > > > > > > > > > `build --release --debug`? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/25/13 1:54 PM, "Michael Brooks" > > > > > > > > > <mich...@michaelbrooks.ca (mailto:mich...@michaelbrooks.ca)> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To be absolutely clear, the above is NOT the motivation > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > changing > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > stuff around. Cordova-cli needs consistency across > > > > > > > > > > > platforms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > motivation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yep, as long as we can guarantee that each script follows a > > > > > > > predictable > > > > > > > > > > input and output, I don't care how we implement it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you guys really want a single entry-point with flags, > > > > > > > > > > then > > go > > > > > > > nuts, > > > > > > > > > but > > > > > > > > > > we will need to clearly define what happens when: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - no flag is provided e.g. `build` > > > > > > > > > > - multiple flags are provided e.g. `build --release --debug` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +1 to adding a script that validates a platform's SDK > > > requirements. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This script should not need to modify project files to > > > > > > > > > > assert > > the > > > > > > > SDK > > > > > > > > > > requirements. I mention this because the current > > > > > > > > > > `cordova-cli` > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Android > > > > > > > > > > `check_requirements` must successfully update the Android > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > project > > > > > > > > > target > > > > > > > > > > before returning true. However, consider the scenario where > > > > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > validate > > > > > > > > > > the SDK before adding the platform - in this case, the > > > > > > > > > > Android > > > > > > > > > > `check_requirements` will always fail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com > > > > > > > > > > (mailto:f...@adobe.com)> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hopefully, next time we will change/update these things > > > > > > > > > > > > it > > > will > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > > > > > real reason (such as SDK tools updates etc...) and not > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > because > > > > we > > > > > > > > > think > > > > > > > > > > > > that there might be a better implementation in C#. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To be absolutely clear, the above is NOT the motivation > > > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > changing > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > stuff around. Cordova-cli needs consistency across > > > > > > > > > > > platforms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > motivation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
