Okay I think I've done a reverse here.  The suggested global <config-file
target="config.xml"> makes it look like target is a path, but it isn't.  If
we can automatically automatically find the right config.xml, why do we
need to be explicit about it path inside the platform specific settings?  I
suggest making this consistant.

Perhaps something like <config-file name="config.xml" path="HERE"> and path
is either optional, or we support a special attribute (auto-path="true")?
 Then, the same pattern can be used inside and outside of platform settings.

-Michal


On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Anis KADRI <[email protected]> wrote:

> The config-file tag was not meant to be used by config.xml only. There
> could be other platform-specific files to edit as well. Those file don't
> have to be XML files either.
>
> That is why <access> elements are currently top level. <access> elements
> should be the same on all platforms, yah ? Why would you discriminate one ?
>
> I don't mind having a top-level config-file but I would specify some sort
> of target. It could just be target="config.xml" and then our configuration
> code would determine where that file is depending on the platform. If only
> for the sake of clarity. We could just assume that whatever top
> level  config-file with no target specified has to be config.xml but
> explicit is better than implicit in my opinion.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, for things like whitelist and preferences this seems necessary :).
> > Ship it!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Michal Mocny <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I think "missing target" bugs would be masked if no-target applied to
> > all.
> > >  Platform specific changes applied to other platforms may usually be
> > > harmlessly ignored and go unnoticed, but sometimes cause hard.
> > >
> > > Therefore, I would prefer a target="all" or target="common".
> > >
> > > I think its a good idea, though.
> > >
> > > -Michal
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:17 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Here's another thought about the config-file changes.
> > > >
> > > > I noticed some of the plugins out there have <access> tags at the top
> > > > level in a plugin's plugin.xml. At first I was like wtf that should
> > exist
> > > > under a <config-file> element, pointing to the config.xml for each
> > > > platform. I realize now the problem with that, though, is that you'll
> > > need
> > > > one of these for each platform, because the target location of the
> > > > config.xml is in different spots, I.e.:
> > > >
> > > > - Android: <config-file target="res/xml/config.xml"><access
> > > > blah></config-file>
> > > > - iOS: <config-file target="www/config.xml"><access
> blah></config-file>
> > > >
> > > > - BlackBerry: <config-file target="www/config.xml"><access
> > > > blah></config-file>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Should we provide some way of modifying the config.xml, agnostic of
> the
> > > > platform, just for these cases where certain config.xml changes apply
> > to
> > > > all platforms? If so, how? A top-level <config-file> element (perhaps
> > > with
> > > > no target attrib)?
> > > >
> > > > On 4/23/13 7:28 PM, "Anis KADRI" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >It doesn't. All configuration edits should happen in prepare
> > > > >(adding/removing xml fragments etc..).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 7:05 PM, Michal Mocny <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> +1 move to prepare, however, why does this only apply to access
> > tags?
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 7:16 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > that¹s what I was thinking too
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On 4/23/13 4:13 PM, "Anis KADRI" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > >On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >> One thing that I intentionally removed from platform-level
> > > > >>`install`
> > > > >> was
> > > > >> > >> adding <access> tags to the config. I figure this should
> > probably
> > > > >>go
> > > > >> > >>into
> > > > >> > >> `prepare`. Thoughts?
> > > > >> > >>
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >In my opinion, this should be part of a configuration handler
> > that
> > > > >> should
> > > > >> > >be called by 'prepare'.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to