Whats the benefit of rolling plugins into a platform? The only one I can see is "installed by default" which means better "out of box" experience for new users.
I think we can solve that problem using a plethora of better alternatives, including install scripts (perhaps with a generator like yeoman, perhaps my just pasting snippets in tutorials), by supporting plugin dependencies for platforms, or just by hard coding a list of default plugins in cordova-cli (we do this in cca for example). Many alternatives exist. I'm not sure if we need to iterate the list of benefits in leaving features implemented inside plugins, but I think its almost entirely upside to do so. -Michal On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > I like it. Statusbar is considered core by the community. That said, should > it be rolled into the platform as a feature? > > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> > wrote: > > > What does core mean? > > > > Does "core" mean that it has the namespace "org.apache.cordova."? > > Does "core" mean that it is something we will support? > > Does "core" mean that it is something that applies to multiple platforms? > > > > > > I would like "core" to be the first two. And by "we", I mean at least one > > committer. That's generally how platforms have worked (if no committers > is > > interested in maintaining them, then they don't get worked on. Otherwise, > > they do). > > > > I do also like the idea of a "org.apache.cordova.labs" namespace. We > could > > use it to mean that it's something we are thinking about being "core" in > > the future, but it's at risk of changing (e.g. API fluctuation), or of us > > deciding it's not actually worth our time to support. > > > > I would put statusbar as "core" given the stated importance of it so far, > > and given that multiple people are willing to work on it. > > > > I would put keyboard as "labs" due to the current quality of it (serious > > iOS7 bugs, unsolved dead-zone when removing accessory). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 7:31 PM, purplecabbage <purplecabb...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > StatusBar wp7+8 is mostly done. Just testing some stuff now. > > > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > > > On Mar 7, 2014, at 3:30 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Technically there are two platforms right now. Android has minimal > > > support, > > > > and Jesse wants to do WP8 (again minimal), so thats another. > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 3:23 PM, Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> +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. > > > >> > > > > > >
