+1!

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
> @purplecabbage
> risingj.com
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 12:54 PM, James Jong <wjamesj...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 Cleaner.  Thanks Andrew!
> > >
> > > -James Jong
> > >
> > > On Apr 30, 2013, at 3:31 PM, Lorin Beer <lorin.beer....@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > > duplicated information is a good redundancy to remove
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Sounds good. FTR we did it for issue tracking not arbitrarily.
> Having
> > > >> a stamp at the top of the file fulfills the same end.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote:
> > > >>> If I recall correctly the original reason was because putting the
> > > version
> > > >>> in after the lib name in the JS filename was what "other libraries
> > did"
> > > >>> aka jQuery.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> +1 from me.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 4/30/13 11:24 AM, "tommy-carlos Williams" <to...@devgeeks.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> +1
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Wouldn't this make mobile spec easier too?
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On 01/05/2013, at 4:20, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org>
> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> This has been brought up a few times, but I'm not sure there's
> > been a
> > > >>>>> decisive answer here yet...
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> iOS now uses "cordova.ios.js"
> > > >>>>> Android uses "cordova.android.js", but renames it in a build step
> > to
> > > >>>>> add in
> > > >>>>> the version number.
> > > >>>>> CLI normalizes to "cordova.js"
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> The version number is now stamped at the top of the file in a
> code
> > > >>>>> comment,
> > > >>>>> and I feel that having it in the file name just makes work for us
> > and
> > > >>>>> our
> > > >>>>> users. I'd like to change all repos to just use "cordova.js".
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Any objections?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Andrew
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to