+1 for labs. it doesn't really make sense to have them in core if they only support one platform.
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 8:47 AM, James Jong <wjamesj...@gmail.com> wrote: > Similar to keyboard plugin, I like the idea of letting this bake in labs > for now and moving them into core if we see multiple platforms start > needing a similar API. So (a) and (c) for me. > > I would add that the iOS 6/7 specific code may not make sense as "core". > > -James Jong > > On Mar 5, 2014, at 9:10 PM, Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I have created a task in JIRA for all the statusbar related discussion. > [1] > > There are numerous inconsistencies we need to address here. > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-6177 > > > > @purplecabbage > > risingj.com > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Some background on the statusbar plugin. > >> > >> This was conceived because of iOS 7 where the statusbar overlays the > >> webview, and a lot of people didn't like their UI changing especially if > >> they still support iOS 6. That is the primary purpose of this plugin, > but > >> there are other features in there as well. In the last few weeks, there > was > >> a pull request (now integrated) for StatusBar.hide and StatusBar.show > for > >> Android as well. > >> > >> The issues related to the statusbar are under the label > "statusbar-plugin" > >> in JIRA, and there are currently 11 open issues. There are pull requests > >> for it from the PhoneGap Build team that I am waiting to integrate -- > not > >> until we get this namespace stuff sorted out. > >> > >> I am not opposed to it being under the "labs" namespace. After talking > to > >> the Adobe team, we could also host the plugin under the PhoneGap Github > >> org, but I'd rather use that as a last resort. > >> > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> > wrote: > >> > >>> (a) Yes. > >>> (b) No -- some organizations (Adobe) don't like this, and we respect > >> that. > >>> We also want to point users at these plugins, so its good to have > >>> developers protected by Apache. > >>> (c) Sure -- so long as labs is clearly separate, and we leave them out > of > >>> blogs / plugin release notes, and we don't impact the rate of releases > >>> (i.e. we don't force devs to test the labs plugins, just verify the > >>> signatures is enough). > >>> (d) I think the "guardian" of these labs plugins should be free to > >> publish. > >>> There is no reason they are lower quality than anything else. > >>> > >>> > >>> Separate issue: is statusbar ready for Core? I think we should leave > it > >> in > >>> labs for a little bit, have at least a few eyes audit the API and > >>> investigate if there is any other similar work in the field before we > >> make > >>> users depend on this, but that it should move to core eventually. > >>> > >>> -Michal > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Shazron <shaz...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> > >>>> statusbar is already published org.apache.cordova.statusbar. > >>>> > >>>> And... Since these plugins are somewhat experimental and we're > starting > >>> the > >>>> process of voting and publishing plugins to dist/, I wonder: > >>>> > >>>> a) Should we change the ID of these plugins to, say > >>>> "org.apache.cordova.labs" > >>>> b) Should we move these plugins to github and have them not under > >> apache > >>>> for now, e.g.: com.shazron.statusbar > >>>> c) Should we just add them to the plugin release process. > >>>> d) Should we just never publish them to the registry and have people > >> use > >>>> them via git url. > >>>> > >>> > >> > >
