Err sorry that's what I meant: <runs/>, not <require/> :P On 7/10/13 7:41 PM, "Michal Mocny" <mmo...@chromium.org> wrote:
>Fil, as an alternative to <require> could you use a <js-module> with ><runs/> instead of clobbers/merges? (not a proposal, just curious) > >-Michal > > >On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> I think you may have to use a combination of both to get it right >> >> On 7/10/13 4:46 PM, "Jesse" <purplecabb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >Thanks Fil, >> >Trying option 1: >> >move the <js-module> definition into the platform definitions, so then >> >you can do something different for windows phone. >> > >> >@purplecabbage >> >risingj.com >> > >> > >> >On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: >> > >> >> I don't think there's anything in the spec that specifically models >> >>"only >> >> patch global `x` if it doesn't exist" if that¹s what you're asking. >> >> >> >> A few workarounds: >> >> - move the <js-module> definition into the platform definitions, so >>then >> >> you can do something different for windows phone. >> >> - use the <require> tag instead of <clobbers> or <merges>, and do the >> >> global assignment yourself in the JS >> >> >> >> On 7/10/13 4:14 PM, "Jesse" <purplecabb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >So in the plugin breakout for Geolocation, we have come across an >>issue >> >> >for >> >> >windows phone. >> >> >The WebBrowser control already has a W3C compliant implementation of >> >>the >> >> >spec, and so we actually don't need to do much to 'install' this >> >>plugin. >> >> >However, because of the following config.xml fragment, and the >> >>resulting >> >> >modification to navigator.geolocation, the working browser code is >> >> >clobbered, and we are left with js code that attempts to call >> >>cordova.exec >> >> >into non-existent native code. >> >> > >> >> ><clobbers target="navigator.geolocation" /> >> >> > >> >> >What would be the preferred way of NOT clobbering the working >> >> >implementation, or at least storing a reference to the clobbered >> >> >implementation so we can duckpunch back to it, or to specify that >>our >> >> >version of the plugin will NOT be including js at all? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >@purplecabbage >> >> >risingj.com >> >> >> >> >> >>
