Perhaps my terminology is wrong but ALL plugins define how they are loaded.
Either (old style) window.plugins = ... or (new style) cordova.define(... My fundamental point is they shouldn't. I don't want my plugins loaded in either of these ways. The loading of plugins should be separate to the plugin definition. Hence my suggestion of; cordova.pluginLoader(...) In this pattern pluginLoader could either have multiple different modes or developers could override it (or both). At the moment I am having to change each plugin to not define its loading implementation. > From: agri...@chromium.org > Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 10:22:35 -0400 > Subject: Re: Suggestion - pluginLoader > To: dev@cordova.apache.org > > For your actual app, you're free to use any JS loader that you'd like. > > Are there really many existing Cordova plugins that use alternate module > package definitions? > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 9:39 AM, J Prince <princej.w...@hotmail.co.uk>wrote: > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > My main point was to make the actual plugin javascript definitions more > > flexible. > > That way it would support more unusual developer requirements (such as > > mine). > > If the plugin definitions did not contain any loader implementation then > > the same definition can be used different ways by different developers. > > > > Currently any existing plugins that I want to use I am making my own copy > > of and modifying to suit my project. > > I found this annoying and produced my suggestion based on that experience. > > > > I suppose it is as much for developer simplicity as anything else. > > A format that supported different use cases would be better for me! > > It would also mean that the cordova team could more easily change the > > javascript plugin loader in future without breaking existing plugins. > > > > I hadn't thought about dynamically loading the native side of plugins. > > I was just assuming that would always be loaded. > > > > > > > From: agri...@chromium.org > > > Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 09:12:42 -0400 > > > Subject: Re: Suggestion - pluginLoader > > > To: dev@cordova.apache.org > > > > > > Hi Jonathan, > > > > > > First, thanks for a well-written proposal. At least for me, I'm not > > really > > > sure that there is enough of a problem with the current approach that > > would > > > justify changing it. That said, business is always an issue, and bumping > > > your thread was the right thing to do :) > > > > > > For Android and iOS, the large majority of plugins require native code in > > > order to be useful, so I don't think that having plugin JS be dynamically > > > seems that useful without being able to dynamically load the native parts > > > of it. > > > > > > You said that you're serving your app via HTTP. I think your best bet > > would > > > be to concat all of your plugin JS together would be by far your biggest > > > performance boost rather than try to selectively load them. > > > > > > Until very recently, Cordova's module system didn't involve a loader at > > > all, and required that all modules be defined ahead of time. Now, we > > > actually do load plugin .js files during start-up, but still not > > on-demand. > > > So, in my mind we really have two things: > > > 1. A registry > > > 2. A boot-up process. > > > > > > To be clear - is it that you want to change the registry part, or is it > > > just that you want to have plugin .js loaded on-demand? Are you concerned > > > about the native side of the plugins? > > > > > > One thing I think maybe we should add is the ability to disable the > > > start-up plugin_loader.js logic for when people want to package the .js > > > themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:30 AM, J Prince <princej.w...@hotmail.co.uk > > >wrote: > > > > > > > So it's been about a week now and I haven't really had any feedback on > > > > this. > > > > https://github.com/jxp/cordova.pluginLoader > > > > I'm not sure if this means; > > > > > > > > a) Everyone is too busy > > > > b) Everyone assumed someone else would respond > > > > c) No-one is that interested in plugin javascript definitions > > > > d) You've had similar discussions before and don't want to start THAT > > again > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: princej.w...@hotmail.co.uk > > > > > To: dev@cordova.apache.org > > > > > Subject: RE: Suggestion - pluginLoader > > > > > Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:55:19 +0100 > > > > > > > > > > I have (briefly) looked at Harmony loaders before but that is a spec > > for > > > > a future javascript language version. > > > > > I have found a module loader that I wish to use (require.js). > > > > > > > > > > My point is that the current suggested module definition for cordova > > > > plugins INCLUDES a loader implementation. > > > > > > > > > > I am suggesting that the loader implementation be removed from the > > > > plugin to a new method cordova.pluginLoader > > > > > This would make the plugins cleaner (as they would only describe > > their > > > > own behaviour) and it would also allow cordova or app developers to > > > > change/customize the loader implementation as needed. > > > > > > > > > > My suggested approach would result in plugins that could be loaded in > > > > multiple different ways including (but not limited to); "classic" > > > > window.plugins, cordova.define and require.js > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: J Prince [mailto:princej.w...@hotmail.co.uk] > > > > > > Sent: Monday, June 17, 2013 7:27 AM > > > > > > To: dev@cordova.apache.org > > > > > > Subject: RE: Suggestion - pluginLoader > > > > > > > > > > > > There are a few main reasons. > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. The app I am working on is an Enterprise app. We are designing > > the > > > > app as a Cordova shell that re-directs to all the html content. This > > means > > > > that we have to dynamically load a different cordova.js (depending on > > > > platform) following the redirect. > > > > > > So we are actually unable to do anything other than dynamically > > load > > > > plugins once the platform specific cordova.js is loaded > > > > > > > > > > > > 2. Some of the plugins will be used incredibly rarely. It doesn't > > seem > > > > necessary to always load plugins until they are needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > 3. We are building with a single page architecture so don't want to > > > > end up with lots of script includes in the index.html page. > > > > > > The define/require pattern feels much cleaner and better > > > > compartmentalized. > > > > > > Our main page currently has 2 script includes: require.js and > > jqmobi. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
