Let's google hangout about this and report back to the list yeah ? My main concern is user confusion like here [1]. When a plugin fails to load/work, people start looking around config files and wonder why it's broken and I feel like the more config stuff we add the more confusion it creates.
[1] https://github.com/imhotep/MapKit/issues/18#issuecomment-25952856 On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Braden Shepherdson <bra...@chromium.org> wrote: > I apologize for getting somewhat short in my previous email. > > Let me explain my comment on needing "more, and more hacky, code". Because > of how Plugman parses the <config-file> tags and makes the edits to the XML > files, it would require special-case logic to find <feature> tags and > inject this extra information into them. Only some <config-file> tags are > pointing at the right file and XPath, and this would have Plugman examining > the children of <config-file> tags instead of treating it as a black box > and copying it in. My proposal of injecting new tags doesn't require > anything like that, Plugman just adds an extra config-munge entry for each > plugin, after it's finished parsing the <config-file> tags. The patch to > implement this only added a few lines. > > This information is being injected by Plugman into the platform config.xml > (the build artifact) at plugman-prepare time. It isn't visible directly to > plugin devs, app devs, or users. But it allows an app or plugin dev who > wants to know what plugins are installed to find out. This allows checking > for an optional dependency, and lets AppHarness check compatibility of its > own plugins with those required by a child app. > > Braden > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> wrote: > >> I'm going to attempt to summarize in point form: >> >> Goal: >> - Make available the list of installed plugins and their versions to >> native side & JS side. >> - Needed by App Harness to know whether an app is compatible with its >> bundled set of plugins. >> >> Using cordova_plugins.js: >> - It doesn't have the information that we need >> - We could add the extra information, but not easily since the file >> exports an array instead of an object. >> - This file is not currently parsed by the native layer, so having the >> info here would be an extra IO on start-up. >> >> Using config.xml: >> - It doesn't have the information that we need >> - This is always loaded by native sides, so it's a nice fit. >> >> Using <feature>: >> - These are for defining Bridge channels >> - Plugins define 0 or more of these >> - Adding empty ones for plugins that don't define them causes exceptions >> in the native layer. We'd like this change to not break older versions of >> cordova. >> >> So, although it seems like <feature> would make sense, we've already used >> <feature> to mean something else (bridge channels). >> >> I think Braden's suggestion of adding a new tag is the simplest, both >> implementation-wise, as well as semantically (it has a single, well-defined >> purpose). What I especially like about it, is that it separates which tags >> are written by plugin devs (<feature>) from tags that are generated by >> plugman (<cordova-plugin>) >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 1:40 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: >> >> > Ok, everybody be calm. We are adults and we are capable of working >> through >> > this in a dispassionate manner and has nothing to do with you, your code, >> > or whatever. We all just want to find the best solution. Blankets >> > statements like 'more hacky code' does no good. Let's just stick to >> factual >> > stuff and stay away from subjective identification. Ok? >> > >> > "as to leaking into userland, these <feature> tags are relevant to plugin >> > developers" ... so would this particular information belong to >> > plugin.xml???? >> > >> > Also, Joe had a good question earlier. Despite all this problem solving I >> > have no idea what the actual problem is we are trying to solve. We have >> > lots of solutions but what precisely do our users gain from runtime >> > introspection here? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Braden Shepherdson < >> bra...@chromium.org >> > >wrote: >> > >> > > Brian, as to leaking into userland, these <feature> tags are relevant >> to >> > > plugin developers, since they have to define the mapping of exec names >> to >> > > native files so we can load their plugins. None of this is visible to >> app >> > > developers or end users. >> > > >> > > We're not paying by the byte, or the top-level tag, in config.xml. NB >> > that >> > > this is the platform config.xml, the one that's a build artifact no one >> > but >> > > the platform code is ever supposed to look at. Why are we sweating so >> > hard >> > > over adding some new information into the file, and trying to shoehorn >> it >> > > into existing tags? The code to handle this is simpler in Plugman and >> on >> > > the platforms to have this be a separate tag, rather than mixing it in >> > with >> > > <feature>. >> > > >> > > If we want to use <feature> tags for this, despite it requiring more, >> and >> > > more hacky, code all around, we're going to need a good reason. I >> haven't >> > > heard any reason for why using <feature> gains us anything. >> > > >> > > Carlos, as I noted in my remixed proposal above, I originally wanted to >> > use >> > > cordova_plugins.js or a similar www/ file for this, but there are >> > problems >> > > with that. On the other hand, I would much rather add a new file that >> can >> > > be loaded as a js-module than do this using hacked-up <feature> tags. >> > > >> > > Braden >> > > >> > > >> > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Don Coleman <don.cole...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > JavaScript only plugin implementations are valid on BlackBerry 10. >> Some >> > > > things that require native code on Android can be implemented in >> client >> > > > side JavaScript on BlackBerry using com.blackberry.invoke. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 12:26 PM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 9:12 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: >> > > > > > First thing: might as well give up on referencing config.xml as a >> > > > > standard. >> > > > > > That's a historical footnote of little relevance anymore! >> > > > > > >> > > > > > It feels leaky to define the mapping in <feature>. Would seem to >> me >> > > > that >> > > > > > <feature> is a userland thing from a user perspective I want to >> > know >> > > > > about >> > > > > > the ID and VERSION and the guts of what happens under the hood is >> > > none >> > > > of >> > > > > > business. No? >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > This is actually where the mapping happens right now, and I really >> > > > > don't want to change this, since changing mapping would break >> > > > > EVERYTHING. That being said, I don't know why we can't have >> feature >> > > > > tags with no *-package params. That being said, I'm not sure what >> > the >> > > > > point would even be, since JS-only plugins aren't really plugins at >> > > > > all and are just Javascript libraries. Are there current examples >> of >> > > > > this in Cordova currently? >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Braden Shepherdson < >> > > > bra...@chromium.org >> > > > > >wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> I'm going to try to summarize some points so we can get on the >> > same >> > > > > page. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> tl;dr: see the last two paragraphs for what I'm actually >> > proposing. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> First, background on why we have <feature> tags. They map a >> bridge >> > > > name >> > > > > >> (eg. "FileTransfer" on all platforms) used with cordova.exec() >> to >> > > the >> > > > > >> native code module that implements the plugin (eg. >> > > > > >> "org.apache.cordova.filetransfer.FileTransfer" on Android, >> > > > > >> "CDVFileTransfer" on iOS, etc.). The native side of the bridge >> > uses >> > > > this >> > > > > >> information to load and call the right plugin's implementation >> > > after a >> > > > > >> cordova.exec() call. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Note that a plugin can define 0 or more <feature> tags. Plugins >> > with >> > > > no >> > > > > >> native code won't have one. In principle, a plugin can have more >> > > than >> > > > > one, >> > > > > >> though we can't think of any examples of that. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> When I first looked at this problem of wanting to know, at >> > runtime, >> > > > what >> > > > > >> plugins are installed, I originally considered using >> > > > cordova_plugins.js >> > > > > to >> > > > > >> learn the information. There are two problems here. One, the >> file >> > > > > doesn't >> > > > > >> include information about plugin id and version. We could add >> it, >> > > but >> > > > > the >> > > > > >> second problem is that cordova_plugins.js maps <js-module> names >> > > (used >> > > > > with >> > > > > >> cordova.require()) to file names. Here again any one plugin can >> > > have 0 >> > > > > or >> > > > > >> more <js-modules>; many have several. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> I then considered using the <feature> tags. The same problems >> > apply >> > > > > here: >> > > > > >> they don't map 1-1, and don't have the data we need. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Others in the thread have proposed adding this data to the >> > <feature> >> > > > > tags, >> > > > > >> and adding <feature> tags automatically for plugins that don't >> > > already >> > > > > have >> > > > > >> one (or alternatively, adding a new, autogenerated <feature> for >> > > every >> > > > > >> plugin). The problem here is that the various native platforms >> are >> > > > > >> expecting each <feature> to define a bridge name -> native code >> > > module >> > > > > >> mapping, and these new ones won't do so. This is a potentially >> > > > > >> bug-introducing change, because we'll have to make sure every >> > > platform >> > > > > can >> > > > > >> handle these new tags which aren't like the old ones. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> All of this led to my original proposal: add a new top-level >> tag, >> > > > > >> <plugins>, whose children are exactly one <plugin id="..." >> > > > > version="..." /> >> > > > > >> for every plugin installed on this platform. We would then have >> > two >> > > > > >> separate lists in config.xml, but they are listing different >> > things >> > > > > (bridge >> > > > > >> mappings vs. plugins) for different purposes. Since this is an >> > > > addition, >> > > > > >> the platforms that don't support the new tag will just ignore it >> > > > safely. >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> I realize that the top-level <plugins> tag is something we had >> > > > > previously, >> > > > > >> before moving to the W3C <widget> spec's <feature> tags instead. >> > I'm >> > > > > >> perfectly willing to change the name, to perhaps >> > > <installed-plugins>, >> > > > to >> > > > > >> avoid any confusion with the old <plugins> tag. Any better >> > > suggestions >> > > > > for >> > > > > >> the names? >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> Braden >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > Didn't recommend anything. Just seeing how the impact is. >> Didn't >> > > > > think of >> > > > > >> > the native bits (the native code that has some js that they >> call >> > > > into) >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Jesse < >> purplecabb...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > Currently installing the plugin org.apache.cordova.device >> will >> > > > add a >> > > > > >> > > different feature tag for each platform/project's >> config.xml. >> > > > > >> > > <!-- firefoxos --> >> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device"> >> > > > > >> > > <param name="firefoxos-package" value="Device" /> >> > > > > >> > > </feature> >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > <!-- android --> >> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device" > >> > > > > >> > > <param name="android-package" >> > > > > >> value="org.apache.cordova.device.Device"/> >> > > > > >> > > </feature> >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > <!-- ios --> >> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device"> >> > > > > >> > > <param name="ios-package" value="CDVDevice"/> >> > > > > >> > > </feature> >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > <!-- blackberry --> >> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device" value="Device"/> >> > > > > >> > > <!-- wp7 and wp8 --> >> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device"> >> > > > > >> > > <param name="wp-package" value="Device"/> >> > > > > >> > > </feature> >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > Also, presumably, the following can be used on ALL without >> > > > conflict: >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > <feature name="Device" value="Device"> >> > > > > >> > > <param name="firefoxos-package" value="Device" /> >> > > > > >> > > <param name="android-package" >> > > > > >> value="org.apache.cordova.device.Device"/> >> > > > > >> > > <param name="ios-package" value="CDVDevice"/> >> > > > > >> > > <param name="wp-package" value="Device"/> >> > > > > >> > > </feature> >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > It would be nice if blackberry supported the >> > feature/param@name >> > > > > >> > > ='bb-package' >> > > > > >> > > but I don't think this is imperative. >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > We are missing a couple points from Braden: >> > > > > >> > > a) js only plugins do not have config.xml entries >> > > > > >> > > b) one plugin may add multiple features ( not sure if this >> has >> > > > ever >> > > > > >> > > happened in practice, it may be easier to just force the >> > plugin >> > > > > >> developer >> > > > > >> > > to make their class have a single point of contact in the >> > > features >> > > > > >> list, >> > > > > >> > > and delegate in their own code. ) >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > Shaz's recommendations break everything everywhere from >> what I >> > > can >> > > > > >> tell. >> > > > > >> > > This would require changes to all existing plugins, AND all >> > > > platform >> > > > > >> > > bridges native bits, and cordova-js. I don't think we want >> to >> > be >> > > > > this >> > > > > >> > > destructive. >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > @purplecabbage >> > > > > >> > > risingj.com >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com >> > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > Let's see the impact of using ID as name >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > 1. plugin.xml feature tag, name attribute -> change the >> > value >> > > to >> > > > > the >> > > > > >> > > plugin >> > > > > >> > > > id. Or just remove the attribute, plugman can inject the >> > > plugin >> > > > id >> > > > > >> > > > automatically(?) so it is less error-prone - not sure >> > > > > >> > > > 2. plugin's js -> change all service names to ID in >> > > cordova.exec >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > For user upgrades, they would remove the old plugin, then >> > add >> > > > the >> > > > > new >> > > > > >> > > one - >> > > > > >> > > > so it's relatively painless I think. >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io >> > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > so would it be insane to deprecate the name thing and >> just >> > > go >> > > > > ID? >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > (Warning: I am insane.) >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Shazron Abdullah < >> > > > > s...@adobe.com> >> > > > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > Brian: plugin mapping "service js name" -> "service >> > native >> > > > > >> > > name/class" >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > On 11/13/13 2:36 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <b...@brian.io> >> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >what are we using <feature> for? >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Braden Shepherdson >> > > > > >> > > > > > ><bra...@google.com>wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> My concern with (ab)using feature tags for this is >> > that >> > > > now >> > > > > >> > > > platforms >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>that >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> don't know about these parameters, and especially >> > about >> > > > the >> > > > > >> > dummy >> > > > > >> > > > ones >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>for >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> js-only plugins, have a bug, rather than a missing >> > > > feature. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Nov 13, 2013 4:40 PM, "Gorkem Ercan" < >> > > > > >> gorkem.er...@gmail.com >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > If a plugin does not inject a feature tag for >> some >> > > > > reason it >> > > > > >> > is >> > > > > >> > > > the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>same >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > deal as before. Plugman injects one with the id >> and >> > > > > version >> > > > > >> as >> > > > > >> > > > > params. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > If a plugin has multiple feature tags since they >> > will >> > > > > have >> > > > > >> the >> > > > > >> > > > same >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> plugin >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > id and version you will still be able to >> introspect >> > > the >> > > > > >> plugin >> > > > > >> > > id >> > > > > >> > > > > and >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > version. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > And apparently adobe sf just had a coffee >> break... >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Gorkem >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Braden >> Shepherdson >> > > > > >> > > > > > >><bra...@chromium.org >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I'm open to changing the names to something >> else, >> > > > > since I >> > > > > >> > > > realize >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>there >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > used to be a <plugins> tag and <plugin> tags >> > > inside, >> > > > > >> before >> > > > > >> > we >> > > > > >> > > > > used >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > <feature>. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Adding these as parameters on the <feature> >> tags >> > is >> > > > not >> > > > > >> > > enough, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>because >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > <feature> tags correspond to "names the bridge >> > > knows >> > > > > >> about", >> > > > > >> > > > which >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>is >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> not >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > quite "plugins". JS-only plugins don't appear >> > here, >> > > > > and a >> > > > > >> > > single >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>plugin >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > can >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > have multiple bridge names pointing at >> different >> > > > > classes. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Braden >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Gorkem Ercan >> > > > > >> > > > > > >><gorkem.er...@gmail.com >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > It is unfortunate that the name attribute on >> > the >> > > > > feature >> > > > > >> > tag >> > > > > >> > > > is >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>not >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > plugin id but a name. The uniqueness of the >> > name >> > > is >> > > > > not >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>guaranteed by >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > plugman so I can imagine this causing >> problems >> > in >> > > > the >> > > > > >> > > future. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I can see the need for the tag but I am not >> > sure >> > > id >> > > > > >> > <plugin> >> > > > > >> > > > tag >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>is >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > correct approach. There are plugins out there >> > > that >> > > > > are >> > > > > >> > still >> > > > > >> > > > > using >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> that >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > tag >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > for instance [1] is from barcode scanner >> plugin >> > > > from >> > > > > the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>registry. As >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > an >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > alternate, <feature> tag can be used and id >> and >> > > > > version >> > > > > >> > info >> > > > > >> > > > can >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>be >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > injected as additional <param> tags by >> plugman. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > [1] <config-file >> target="res/xml/plugins.xml" >> > > > > >> > > > > parent="/plugins"> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > <plugin name="BarcodeScanner" >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > value="com.phonegap.plugins.barcodescanner.BarcodeScanner"/> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > </config-file> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Gorkem >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Braden >> > > > Shepherdson < >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > bra...@chromium.org >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > The <feature> tags list only those plugins >> > > which >> > > > > are >> > > > > >> > > > relevant >> > > > > >> > > > > to >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > bridge. Also they map from exec bridge name >> > to >> > > > > native >> > > > > >> > code >> > > > > >> > > > > class >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > name, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > and >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > have no information about which plugin >> > they're >> > > > > from, >> > > > > >> or >> > > > > >> > > that >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> plugin's >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > id >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > or >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > version. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > As to multiple platforms, there are several >> > > > reasons >> > > > > >> why >> > > > > >> > > I'm >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> unlikely >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > to >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > add >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > this feature to platforms other than iOS or >> > > > > Android. >> > > > > >> > > First, >> > > > > >> > > > > I'm >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>not >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > set >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > up >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > for development on any of the others. This >> is >> > > > > >> especially >> > > > > >> > > > true >> > > > > >> > > > > of >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > ones >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > that can't be built on Mac, especially >> > Windows >> > > > > >> (Phone). >> > > > > >> > > > > Second, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>I >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > don't >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > know anything about developing on those >> > > > platforms: >> > > > > I >> > > > > >> > don't >> > > > > >> > > > > know >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > libraries or tools (or C# for Windows et >> al). >> > > > > Third, >> > > > > >> > what >> > > > > >> > > > I'm >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > ultimately >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > working on is getting the App Harness >> working >> > > > > nicely >> > > > > >> as >> > > > > >> > a >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>launcher >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > and >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > testbed for mobile Chrome apps, which only >> > > > support >> > > > > iOS >> > > > > >> > and >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>Android >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > anyway. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > I agree the platforms should strive for >> > > > > consistency, >> > > > > >> but >> > > > > >> > > any >> > > > > >> > > > > new >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > features >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > have to start somewhere. This is a pretty >> > > > > >> > straightforward >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > implementation, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > and with my work on Android and iOS as a >> > > > > reference, it >> > > > > >> > > > should >> > > > > >> > > > > be >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > quick >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > to >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > add to other platforms. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Braden >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:54 PM, Jesse < >> > > > > >> > > > > purplecabb...@gmail.com >> > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Adding this to iOS and Android only is >> kind >> > > of >> > > > > mean. >> > > > > >> > > What >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>ends >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> up >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > happening is the high profile platforms >> > (ie. >> > > > the >> > > > > >> ones >> > > > > >> > > that >> > > > > >> > > > > get >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> ALL >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > attention) get a new feature and the >> others >> > > > > 'appear' >> > > > > >> > to >> > > > > >> > > be >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> behind. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > I >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > think >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > we should focus on remaining consistent >> to >> > > some >> > > > > >> > degree, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>otherwise >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > you >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > end >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > up just making more work for the other >> > > platform >> > > > > >> > > > developers. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > This does not seem like it would be hard >> > for >> > > > you >> > > > > to >> > > > > >> > > > > implement >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>on >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > windows >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > phone and blackberry as well, and having >> > you >> > > > > spend a >> > > > > >> > few >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>minutes >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> in >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > those >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > platforms would probably be a good thing >> > > > anyway. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I too am also not sure why the existing >> > > feature >> > > > > tag >> > > > > >> in >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>config.xml >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > is >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > not >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > enough. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > @purplecabbage >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > risingj.com >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Gorkem >> > > Ercan >> > > > < >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > gorkem.er...@gmail.com >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hey Braden, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Why is not the current <feature> tags >> > > > > sufficient >> > > > > >> for >> > > > > >> > > > this? >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Gorkem >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Braden >> > > > > >> Shepherdson >> > > > > >> > < >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > bra...@chromium.org >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Hey folks, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > We've been kicking around the idea of >> > > > > getting at >> > > > > >> > > which >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > plugins/versions >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > are >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > installed, at runtime. In order to >> make >> > > > that >> > > > > >> > happen, >> > > > > >> > > > > I've >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> taken >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > first >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > step of having plugman prepare >> insert a >> > > tag >> > > > > into >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>config.xml >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> for >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > each >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > plugin. It will look like this: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > <plugins> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > <plugin >> id="org.apache.cordova.file" >> > > > > >> > > version="0.2.5" >> > > > > >> > > > > /> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > <plugin >> > > > > id="org.apache.cordova.file-transfer" >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> version="0.3.4" >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > /> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > </plugins> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > NB that Plugman is injecting this >> > > > > automatically, >> > > > > >> > and >> > > > > >> > > > > this >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>tag >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > should >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > NOT >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > appear in the plugin.xml's >> > <config-file> >> > > > > tags. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Now I'll be adding logic to the >> > > config.xml >> > > > > >> parser >> > > > > >> > on >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>Android >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > and >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > iOS, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > but >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > other platform maintainers will have >> to >> > > > step >> > > > > in >> > > > > >> > for >> > > > > >> > > > the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>other >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > platforms. >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Tracking the progress here: >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-5379 >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > (If you're wondering why we have >> > > motivation >> > > > > for >> > > > > >> > > this, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>it's to >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > make >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > AppHarness more informative, and more >> > > > > robust, by >> > > > > >> > > > warning >> > > > > >> > > > > > >>the >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > user >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > when >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > an >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > app they've installed is looking for >> > > > plugins >> > > > > the >> > > > > >> > > > harness >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> can't >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > provide, >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > or >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > where versions mismatch.) >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Braden >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >>
