Sure, move the RC along so we can discuss calmly. -Michal
On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > +1 > > Lets start a fresh thread that describes the problem discreetly and > work out a solution together. I suspect we'll arrive at a different > solution than moving folders around. > > > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > > So for the sake of moving the RC release along, Michal/Braden/Andrew are > > you guys cool if we: > > > > A) revert to www/ as root folder > > B) proceed with 2.8.0rc1 tagging > > C) continue with this discussion to try to get to a resolution. > Worst-case > > we call a vote next week? > > > > On 5/23/13 10:56 AM, "Michal Mocny" <mmo...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > >>Fil, that sounds extremely sensible. > >> > >> > >>On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:32 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> > >>> https://npmjs.org/package/cordova > >>> > >>> > >>> While CLI is not a documented flow, it is deployed and has > 1000 > >>> downloads per month. > >>> > >>> That's my only concern: not fucking those people over. > >>> > >>> I'm in favor of that structure I just don't want it to change without > >>> warning in this next release. Ideally set up deprecation messages, be > >>> noisy about the change, and sure, possibly supporting a transitioning > >>> automatically in our tooling, and then land it in full and remove > >>> deprecation messages about it in 3.0. > >>> > >>> On 5/23/13 9:27 AM, "Michal Mocny" <mmo...@chromium.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> >Clarification of typing mistake, below.. > >>> > > >>> >Also, curious why this breaks things in the first place? I thought > >>>this > >>> >is > >>> >the first time we are releasing these tools? The current create > script > >>> >workflow is totally different, and I know there is a npm package for > >>> >cordova cli already, but that was never a promoted flow (matter of > >>>fact, > >>> >why was it released? Are we supporting current users of that, is that > >>>it?) > >>> > > >>> >-Michal > >>> > > >>> >On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> > >>> >wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Brian, > >>> >> I do not really understand your previous point, but I'll take a > stab. > >>> >> > >>> >> First some clarification: I think there are two logical "roots", > (1) > >>> >>the > >>> >> root of your web app (holds merges/ and www/ and maybe more), and > (2) > >>> >>the > >>> >> root of your cordova workspace (holds platforms/ plugins/ and maybe > >>> >>more). > >>> >> > >>> >> With the app/ folder, (1) is a subdirectory (2). With the current > >>> >> situation, they overlap inside the same folder. > >>> >> > >>> >> I think it should be a goal to version control, share, and perhaps > >>> >>bundle > >>> >> auxiliary resources with app/'s. > >>> >> I think it should also be a goal to not limit the future structure > of > >>> >>the > >>> >> cordova workspace (ie, build artifacts). > >>> >> > >>> >> The current situation makes these goals harder. > >>> >> > >>> >> As one data point, our team here has a workflow where we share > >>>several > >>> >> apps (containing only the contents(2)), and we share the common > >>>plugins > >>> >>we > >>> >> work on. > >>> >> The contents of (1) are never committed, shared, etc, and are just > >>> >> recreated on a regular basis as cordova versions change and as we > >>>test > >>> >>for > >>> >> different platforms. Sidenote: yes, I have multiple different > >>>cordova > >>> >> workspaces pointing to one common app to test with different > >>>versions. > >>> >> This is a bit of a cordova-developer necessity, but it would be > >>> >> interesting if external devs could trial out new cordova releases on > >>>the > >>> >> side, trivially.. > >>> >> > >>> >Sigh, of course I got the numbers reversed here.. my bad. Of course I > >>> >mean > >>> >we only commit (1). > >>> > > >>> > > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> So, like you Brian, we are just trying to get all the > >>> >>requirements/wishes > >>> >> on the table so we can make a conscious decision here. It looks > like > >>> >>you > >>> >> are not seeing sufficient motivation for making the change, and we > >>>are > >>> >>not > >>> >> seeing any reason to not make it. > >>> >> > >>> >> Another observation: the transition path even easier than we have > >>> >>outlined > >>> >> above. > >>> >> > >>> >> If your existing project is: > >>> >> - app_name/ > >>> >> - platforms/ > >>> >> - plugins/ > >>> >> - www/ > >>> >> - merges/ > >>> >> > >>> >> All you need to do is rm -rf platforms/ plugins/ www/config.xml -- > >>>which > >>> >> you need to do anyway to upgrade to 3.0 -- create a new config.xml > at > >>> >>the > >>> >> root and you now have a shareable app, and you can create as many > >>> >>cordova > >>> >> different workspaces using it as you want. > >>> >> > >>> >> -Michal > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > >>> >> > >>> >>> Not buying that either. The `./app` directory lives in the root so > >>> >>> everything will have to change when we hit the reality you describe > >>> >>> where `./app` IS the root. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> What you are really saying this is a transition step until such > time > >>> >>> as `./app` becomes top level and things return to the same as they > >>>are > >>> >>> today but we do not require native bits to be revisioned. > >>>Essentially > >>> >>> this is an aesthetic forcing function to get back to the original > >>> >>> structure. =P > >>> >>> > >>> >>> This is a very complicated way to achieve the goal of native bits > >>> >>> being build artifacts. A goal I share, many do, and I think we can > >>> >>> achieve it by NOT breaking things today. > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:21 AM, Braden Shepherdson > >>> >>><bra...@chromium.org> > >>> >>> wrote: > >>> >>> > cd app > >>> >>> > git init > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > Now my app directory - everything that makes this app mine and > >>>isn't > >>> >>> just a > >>> >>> > cordova-cli artifact - is version controlled. I can easily check > >>>out > >>> >>>a > >>> >>> new > >>> >>> > copy with a cordova create ...; rm -rf app; git clone https:// > >>> >>> .../myrepo.git > >>> >>> > app > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > Once we have app-level dependencies (which is planned > >>>regardless), I > >>> >>>can > >>> >>> > add cordova fetch-deps or whatever we decide the command should > >>>be, > >>> >>>and > >>> >>> now > >>> >>> > my app is fully set up. No need to juggle .gitignore or anything > >>> >>>else. > >>> >>> It's > >>> >>> > hardly a killer feature, but I think it is an improvement. > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > Michal asked what change we would regret more a year from now. I > >>> >>>think > >>> >>> this > >>> >>> > style makes the separation of CLI artifacts and my app more > clear, > >>> >>>and > >>> >>> if > >>> >>> > we add more pieces to either it won't require changing people's > >>> >>> .gitignore > >>> >>> > files or knowing about the architecture. > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > Braden > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> > wrote: > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >> I want to be very clear that my tone here is emotionless! I'm > >>> >>>totally > >>> >>> >> indifferent. > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> Now, please explain: how is a new directory make version control > >>> >>> >> easier? I don't buy it. > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> >> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 8:02 AM, Braden Shepherdson < > >>> >>> bra...@chromium.org> > >>> >>> >> wrote: > >>> >>> >> > The change is not purely aesthetic; it means that the "my app" > >>> >>> portions > >>> >>> >> of > >>> >>> >> > the structure are now contained in a single directory, and > >>>easier > >>> >>>to > >>> >>> >> > version control. > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > This change gets more expensive every day. If we're ever going > >>>to > >>> >>>do > >>> >>> it, > >>> >>> >> it > >>> >>> >> > should be done now, I believe. > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > It seems like the (not universally supported) consensus from > >>>the > >>> >>> first > >>> >>> >> pass > >>> >>> >> > at this thread was to keep the app/ dir but have automatic > >>> >>>detection > >>> >>> and > >>> >>> >> > ask-then-automatic conversion. > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > If that approach is still acceptable, I will implement that > >>> >>>support > >>> >>> today > >>> >>> >> > before we tag CLI for 2.8. > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > Braden > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:30 AM, Michal Mocny > >>> >>><mmo...@chromium.org> > >>> >>> >> wrote: > >>> >>> >> > > >>> >>> >> >> Fil, good summary, thanks for that. I also agree with your > >>> >>> proposal. > >>> >>> >> >> Would it be possible to just support both options starting > >>>now, > >>> >>>and > >>> >>> >> >> "deprecate" www/ at the top level in 3.0? > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> Brian, this isn't just aesthetics, but its true that either > >>> >>>option > >>> >>> can, > >>> >>> >> >> with varying difficulty, be made to work for all use cases. > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> Migration path is trivial but will be paid by all users, > >>>still, > >>> >>> >> workflows > >>> >>> >> >> will change completely with 3.0 anyway, this being the least > >>>of > >>> >>>the > >>> >>> >> >> changes. Which decision is more likely to be regretted a > year > >>> >>>from > >>> >>> now? > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> -Michal > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Andrew Grieve < > >>> >>> agri...@chromium.org > >>> >>> >> >> >wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> >> > I don't really think this directory change is a big deal. > We > >>> >>>break > >>> >>> >> things > >>> >>> >> >> > in almost every release (e.g. loading pages of http), yet > >>>we're > >>> >>> >> having so > >>> >>> >> >> > much debate over alpha tool. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> >>> >> >> > The migration path is: mkdir app && git mv www merges app > && > >>> >>>git > >>> >>> mv > >>> >>> >> >> > app/www/config.xml app > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> >>> >> >> > I think the least amount of work here is to just > >>>console.log an > >>> >>> error > >>> >>> >> >> > message with this command if the app/ directory is not > >>>found. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> >>> >> >> > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams > >>> >>> >> >> > <to...@devgeeks.org>wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> >>> >> >> > > Is it bad that I both agree vehemently with Brian's > >>>calling > >>> >>>it > >>> >>> not > >>> >>> >> >> > > beneficial enough to justify, but also really really like > >>>the > >>> >>> >> proposed > >>> >>> >> >> > > structure better that the current one? hehe. > >>> >>> >> >> > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > *soŠ conflicted...* > >>> >>> >> >> > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > - tommy > >>> >>> >> >> > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > On 23/05/2013, at 7:35 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> > >>>wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > There are two paths. I argue there is no functional > >>>benefit > >>> >>> and > >>> >>> >> that > >>> >>> >> >> > > > this change is purely aesthetic. Aesthetics are > >>>important > >>> >>>but > >>> >>> I'd > >>> >>> >> >> > > > argue folder structure is the last part of the > developer > >>> >>> >> aesthetics > >>> >>> >> >> we > >>> >>> >> >> > > > should worry about and especially not beneficial enough > >>>to > >>> >>> >> justify a > >>> >>> >> >> > > > breaking change. > >>> >>> >> >> > > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > Today: > >>> >>> >> >> > > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > ./ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > |- merges/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > |- platforms/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > |- plugins/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > '- www/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > |- index.html > >>> >>> >> >> > > > '- config.xml > >>> >>> >> >> > > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > Proposed: > >>> >>> >> >> > > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > ./ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > |- platforms/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > |- plugins/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > '- app/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > |- merges/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > |- www/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > > | '- index.html > >>> >>> >> >> > > > '- config.xml > >>> >>> >> >> > > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:47 PM, Filip Maj > >>><f...@adobe.com> > >>> >>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> I'm reviving this discussion re: additional app/ > >>>folder in > >>> >>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> cli-generated project structure. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> To recap, there were two main discussions: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> A) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> > http://apache.markmail.org/thread/syo24cwvhpkxqfdm#query:+page:1+mid:j76 > >>> >>>xli > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> hsfjmvwtoi+state:results > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> B) > >>> >>> >> > http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@cordova.apache.org/msg05775.html > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> Arguments for moving to app/: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> - easier to version control relevant / > >>>non-build-artifact > >>> >>>app > >>> >>> >> bits > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> - aesthetics > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> Arguments against it: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> - we break shit for users > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> - config.xml location and PhoneGap Build compatibility > >>> >>>(but I > >>> >>> >> don't > >>> >>> >> >> > see > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> this as a valid argument against. This is an easy > >>>problem > >>> >>>to > >>> >>> >> solve > >>> >>> >> >> for > >>> >>> >> >> > > us > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> Adobe folk and the tooling can handle the trivial > >>>steps of > >>> >>> going > >>> >>> >> up > >>> >>> >> >> > one > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> directory to grab the right file before interfacing > >>>with > >>> >>> Build) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> Also worth noting: people we're not against it for > >>> >>> architectural > >>> >>> >> >> > > reasons, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> in fact, most people were favorable for the change to > >>> >>>app/. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> So, with plugman stabilizing and my focus moving to > cli > >>> >>> work, I > >>> >>> >> >> feel I > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> have a good grasp of both projects and the direction > >>>they > >>> >>>are > >>> >>> >> going, > >>> >>> >> >> > > here > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> is my suggestion on how to move forward with this: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> 1. cordova-cli's master branch, which will soon merge > >>> >>>future > >>> >>> work > >>> >>> >> >> in, > >>> >>> >> >> > > will > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> revert to the old /www-based structure, then > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> 2. In 3.0 we make the change, where landing such a > >>> >>>breaking > >>> >>> >> change > >>> >>> >> >> is > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> easier and we'll have a bunch of press/noise about the > >>> >>> release > >>> >>> >> out > >>> >>> >> >> > there > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> too so communicating this change would be easier. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> If there are any other arguments for/against the app/ > >>> >>>based > >>> >>> >> >> structure, > >>> >>> >> >> > > now > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> is the time to bring it up. We can give this some more > >>> >>>time > >>> >>> to > >>> >>> >> bake, > >>> >>> >> >> > but > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> after 2.8 is released, I'd like to call a vote on > >>>whether > >>> >>>we > >>> >>> >> should > >>> >>> >> >> > move > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> to this structure or not in 3.0. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> On 4/16/13 8:31 AM, "Michal Mocny" > >>><mmo...@chromium.org> > >>> >>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> I should also add. I appreciate that this is a > >>>change, > >>> >>>and > >>> >>> >> every > >>> >>> >> >> > > change > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> has some learning overhead and we shouldn't stuff > >>> >>>everything > >>> >>> >> >> possible > >>> >>> >> >> > > in > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> all the time. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> However, I think 3.0 and cli are a big change, and we > >>> >>> should do > >>> >>> >> the > >>> >>> >> >> > big > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> re-org all at once, so lets decide this now in a way > >>>we > >>> >>>wont > >>> >>> >> >> regret. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> Thats > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> why we are being picky, I guess. I like knowing that > >>>the > >>> >>> root > >>> >>> >> of > >>> >>> >> >> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> project has cordova-only artifacts and your app-repo > >>>is > >>> >>> just a > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> subdirectory > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> somewhere. Then, the exact location and exact > >>>contents > >>> >>>are > >>> >>> way > >>> >>> >> >> more > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> flexible. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> -Michal > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Michal Mocny < > >>> >>> >> >> mmo...@chromium.org> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> Okay, we've got options, so lets try to distill the > >>> >>> details. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> First, some of the other (perceived) benefits of an > >>>app > >>> >>> folder > >>> >>> >> >> are: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> * we do a raw cp -r of the www/ folder, and so that > >>> >>>should > >>> >>> have > >>> >>> >> >> only > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> platform agnostic and "necessary" files. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> * merges folder was removed from www/ because it did > >>>not > >>> >>> meet > >>> >>> >> >> above > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> criteria, and config.xml is another candidate > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> * there also potentially exist docs/ (useful for > >>>shared > >>> >>> apps, > >>> >>> >> like > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> mobile-spec), platform specific resource files > >>>(icons, > >>> >>> splash > >>> >>> >> >> > screen), > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> etc > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> * a git repository is already basically mirroring > the > >>> >>> concept > >>> >>> >> of > >>> >>> >> >> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> "app > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> folder" > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> So, I've come up with the following potential > >>>workflows > >>> >>>for > >>> >>> >> >> starting > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> with > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> an existing app: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> #1: "your app repo is moved into some subdirectory > >>>of a > >>> >>> cordova > >>> >>> >> >> > > project > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> -- > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> its exact location is basically a cordova artifact" > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova create Foo > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cd Foo > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova app add [--link] git-repo/local-repo > (nicely > >>> >>>akin > >>> >>> to > >>> >>> >> >> plugin > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> add) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova plugin/platforms add ... > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> #2: "your app repo becomes a cordova project > >>>in-place" > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> git clone FooApp (this repo contains merges/ and > >>>www/) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova create FooApp Foo (cli should not clobber > >>> >>>existing > >>> >>> >> >> folders) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cd FooApp > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> set up .gitignore for cordova artifacts (cordova > >>>should > >>> >>> try > >>> >>> >> not > >>> >>> >> >> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> introduce new artifacts) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova plugin/platforms add ... > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> #3: "what we have now" > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> git clone FooApp > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova create Foo > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cp -R FooApp/{www,merges,...} Foo (or ln -s) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cd Foo > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova plugin/platforms add ... > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> (Please let me know of more workflows) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> Workflow #1 I think is very clean, and requires an > >>>app > >>> >>> folder > >>> >>> >> >> > concept > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> (we > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> could maybe use a temporary intermediate folder to > >>>get > >>> >>> around > >>> >>> >> >> this, > >>> >>> >> >> > > but > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> why). > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> Workflow #2 essentially your app repo is the app > >>>folder > >>> >>> >> concept, > >>> >>> >> >> but > >>> >>> >> >> > > now > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> the cordova artifacts also go inside it. Would > >>>require > >>> >>> minimal > >>> >>> >> >> > > changes > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova-cli to not clobber, and requires gitignore. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> Workflow #3 is what we have now, which I think is > the > >>> >>>worst > >>> >>> >> option > >>> >>> >> >> > for > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> app > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> management, but can work with or without an app > >>>folder. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> Also, I think it would be great if apps had both > >>>plugin > >>> >>>and > >>> >>> >> >> platform > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> dependancies, such that you could distill workflow > #1 > >>> >>>down > >>> >>> to: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova create Foo > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cd Foo > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> cordova app add git-repo > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> .. and it would run the plugin/platform add > >>> >>>automatically. > >>> >>> Can > >>> >>> >> >> even > >>> >>> >> >> > > get > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> that down to a single "cordova create git-repo" > line. > >>> >>>That > >>> >>> >> would > >>> >>> >> >> > make > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> sharing apps, such as mobile-spec-test, really > >>>trivial. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> -Michal > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Andrew Grieve > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> <agri...@chromium.org>wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> So, reading through the thread Braden linked to: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> > >>> >>> >> > http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@cordova.apache.org/msg05775.html > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> There are two advantage that were brought up: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> 1. config.xml (configuration) does not live along > >>>side > >>> >>>of > >>> >>> app > >>> >>> >> >> > > resources > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> 2. It will make it easier to package apps > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> - E.g. zip the app/ directory and install it into > >>>the > >>> >>> >> >> app-harness > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> (instead of zipping www + merges). Likewise for > >>> >>>phonegap > >>> >>> >> build. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> - E.g. cordova-mobile-spec would contain the > >>>contents > >>> >>>of > >>> >>> >> app/. > >>> >>> >> >> > With > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> our > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> current setup, it would contain www/ merges/, and > >>>have > >>> >>> the CLI > >>> >>> >> >> > place > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> build > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> artifacts within the repo's directory instead of as > >>>a > >>> >>> sibling > >>> >>> >> to > >>> >>> >> >> > it. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> I think everyone acknowledged the benefits, but > >>>there > >>> >>>was > >>> >>> >> still > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> not consensus over whether it was "worth it". > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> I don't really feel strongly about it. Braden says > >>>it's > >>> >>> easy > >>> >>> >> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > change > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> code-wise. Does anyone want to go to bat for it? > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Brian LeRoux > >>> >>><b...@brian.io > >>> >>> > > >>> >>> >> >> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> I'd rather we did not go ahead w/ the new > directory > >>> >>> >> structure. > >>> >>> >> >> It > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> offers no > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> functional benefit, and comes at an upgrade cost > >>>for > >>> >>>ppl > >>> >>> >> using > >>> >>> >> >> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> CLI > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> tools today. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Andrew Grieve < > >>> >>> >> >> > > agri...@chromium.org > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> Just catching up on the past week of emails and > >>>it's > >>> >>>not > >>> >>> >> clear > >>> >>> >> >> > that > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> there > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> was a consensus here. By the sounds of it though: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> 1. Lots of users are using Cordova-CLI (master > >>> >>>branch) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> 2. Cordova-CLI's "future" branch has > >>> >>> >> non-backwards-compatible > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> changes. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> 3. One of these changes is the directory > >>>structure. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> The main debate is on how to message these > >>>changes to > >>> >>> users. > >>> >>> >> >> What > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> we > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> should > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> do is: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> 1. Have an upgrade guide. (e.g. paths are now > >>> >>>relative > >>> >>> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> plugin.xml) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> 2. Ensure that our error handling shows useful > >>> >>>messages > >>> >>> when > >>> >>> >> >> they > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> result > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> from an old-way-of-doing-things (e.g. your app's > >>> >>> structure > >>> >>> >> >> > doesn't > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> match.) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> Rather than printing out the commands to run to > >>> >>>convert > >>> >>> >> their > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> project, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> maybe we could have them in the upgrade guide and > >>> >>>have > >>> >>> the > >>> >>> >> >> error > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> messages > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> point to the guide? > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Tim Kim < > >>> >>> >> timki...@gmail.com> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> Braden I have merged master and the future > >>>branch: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> https://github.com/timkim/plugman/tree/future_master_merge > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> I think it's about ready to merge back in to > >>>future. > >>> >>> I've > >>> >>> >> >> gotten > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> android-one-install and the > >>>ios-config-xml-install > >>> >>> (minus > >>> >>> >> one > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> weird > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> test > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> I > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> don't understand) working. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> On 10 April 2013 14:42, Anis KADRI < > >>> >>> anis.ka...@gmail.com> > >>> >>> >> >> > wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> As far as I am concerned I don't really have a > >>> >>>strong > >>> >>> >> opinion > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> on > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> this > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> topic. As I said in the previous thread, I do > >>>like > >>> >>> this > >>> >>> >> new > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> directory > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> structure and if you have it there and tested > >>>then > >>> >>> fine. > >>> >>> >> We > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> break > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> shit > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> all > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> the time it's not like this change is one too > >>>many. > >>> >>> What > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> matters > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> is > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> communicate it to our users and give them an > >>> >>>upgrade > >>> >>> path > >>> >>> >> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> this > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> new > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> app > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> structure (the Cordova docs are a good place > for > >>> >>> that). > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> However, I agree with Brian that there are more > >>> >>> important > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> things > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> tackle > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> right now. Now sure what you had on your list > >>>but > >>> >>> since js > >>> >>> >> >> only > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> modules > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> are > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> in Plugman right now (untested) The next big > >>>thing > >>> >>> that is > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> going > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> be > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> non-trivial is: plugin dependencies (which will > >>>in > >>> >>> some > >>> >>> >> ways > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> involve > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> discovery I think). We should have a discussion > >>> >>>about > >>> >>> that > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> (hangout, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> IRC, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> connect...whatever). I have a couple of ideas > >>>about > >>> >>> that. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> Tim is working on fixing/adding/updating > plugman > >>> >>>tests > >>> >>> >> and it > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> looks > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> like > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> he's making good progress on it. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> -a > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Michael Wolf > < > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> michael.w...@cynergy.com > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> +1 > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> I get the intention, however anything we can > >>>do to > >>> >>> reduce > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> this > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> type > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> of > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> breaking change should be done. These type > of > >>> >>> changes > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> should > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> be > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> considered for major releases only so users > can > >>> >>>plan > >>> >>> for > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> them. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> mw > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> On 4/9/13 5:05 PM, "Jesse" > >>> >>><purplecabb...@gmail.com> > >>> >>> >> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> +1 to the sanity plea of devgeek Tommy > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Also, if it didn't happen on this list, .... > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> 'Consensus' should always be tracked back to > a > >>> >>> thread > >>> >>> >> here, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> regardless > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> of > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> meetings, hangouts, irc, bbs, ... > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> @purplecabbage > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> risingj.com > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 1:48 PM, tommy-carlos > >>> >>> Williams > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> <to...@devgeeks.org>wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, but as someone that helps users > >>>everyday, > >>> >>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> almost > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> "it's > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> alpha, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> they shoulda seen it coming" tone of this is > >>>a > >>> >>>bit > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> upsetting. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> It reminds me of before the deprecation > >>>policy, > >>> >>>etc > >>> >>> >> when > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> PhoneGap > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> would > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> completely break everything whenever a new > >>> >>>version > >>> >>> came > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> out. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I feel like we have come a long way since > >>>then > >>> >>> (with a > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> ways > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> still > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> go, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> no question about it). I would hate to be > >>>the > >>> >>>one > >>> >>> in > >>> >>> >> IRC > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> and on > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Google > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Group list having to explain this to > everyone > >>> >>> using the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> cli. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> I was under the impression that the cli was > >>> >>> "shipping" > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> now, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> not > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> just a > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> little side thing. I know that quite a few > >>> >>>people > >>> >>> are > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> using > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> it > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> for > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> real > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> apps (myself included). If that is true, > >>>then we > >>> >>> have a > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> duty > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> at > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> least > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> think very carefully before breaking > >>>something > >>> >>>and > >>> >>> >> come up > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> with > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> a > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> good > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> plan > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> for easing that transition. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> - tommy > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/04/2013, at 1:40, Braden Shepherdson < > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> bra...@chromium.org > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> This mailing list post is, or will shortly > >>>be, > >>> >>> indexed > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> by > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> Google > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> and > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> others. Any newcomers will see the new docs > >>>and > >>> >>> create > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> new > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> projects. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> As I mentioned on IRC, existing users are > >>> >>>either > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> accepting > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> or > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> ignoring > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> "alpha" warnings that this software is new > >>>and > >>> >>> under > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> heavy > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> development, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> if they want to jump on it early they're > >>>going > >>> >>>to > >>> >>> have > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> expect > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> some > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> pain. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> That said, I don't really know of any > better > >>> >>>way > >>> >>> to > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> socialize > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> it. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> Is > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> there > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> anywhere where a brief blog post on this > >>>would > >>> >>> make > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> sense? > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know how many people are using > these > >>> >>> tools and > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> not > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> on > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> mailing > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> list, though certainly some turn up on IRC > >>> >>> >> occasionally. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Braden > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Filip Maj > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> <f...@adobe.com> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> How will we communicate this change to our > >>> >>> existing > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> users? > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 4/9/13 5:22 PM, "Braden Shepherdson" < > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> bra...@chromium.org > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've just pushed a change to the future > >>> >>>branch > >>> >>> that > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> changes > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> directory > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> structure to: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> app/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merges/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> android/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ios/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> www/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> config.xml > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As was discussed at our video conference > >>> >>> meeting a > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> couple of > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> weeks > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> ago, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this has a number of advantages: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - config.xml is no longer in the www/ > >>> >>>directory > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - One can easily version control the > whole > >>> >>>app/ > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> directory, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> and > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> get > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> their > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> web assets, merges and so on into the > >>>repo. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - That repo can contain additional > >>> >>>information: > >>> >>> a > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> README.md, > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> supplementary > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> documentation, tests, whatever. The CLI > >>>will > >>> >>> ignore > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> anything > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> outside of > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> merges and www directories. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The downside is that this is a breaking > >>> >>>change: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> running > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> new > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> version of > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the tools on an old project will fail > >>>(but I > >>> >>> think > >>> >>> >> in > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> a > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> harmless > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> way) > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> until > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you rearrange the directories. You can do > >>> >>>that > >>> >>> with > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> the > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> following > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> commands: > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> $ mkdir app > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> $ mv www/config.xml app > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> $ mv www app > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> $ mv merges app > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All docs and tests are updated as well. > >>>Any > >>> >>> problems > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> should > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> be > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> reported on > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JIRA and assigned to me. > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Braden > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> -- > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> Timothy Kim > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>>> > >>> >>> >> >> > > >> > >>> >>> >> >> > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > > >>> >>> >> >> > > >>> >>> >> >> > >>> >>> >> > >>> >>> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> > >>> > > >
