On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Anis KADRI <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Michal Mocny <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Alright, this thread is starting to run away, I think. > > > > We have a G+ Hangout scheduled for next week. This looks like a great > > topic to discuss. Generally, I think we should resolve these disputes > the > > only way that makes real sense: produce a set of test cases that work > today > > and that we want to continue to work after this change and hand them over > > to Anis/Brian. That way we can be tangible with our arguments. We'll do > > that from our end in prep for next week. > > > > Yes! That is exactly what I have been asking for :-) > > > > > > (I think some of the friction here comes because this isn't seen as a > pain > > point / priority, and so aversion to change kicks in. However, > Anis/Brian > > seem excited about it and have put in the leg work, and that certainly > > meets my bar for acceptance.) > > > > So, lets leave the discussion for next Tuesday at the Hangout. Come with > > use cases. > > > > Looking forward to this. Do we have a a shared agenda somewhere yet ? > List of hangouts scheduled: https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/Google%20Hangout%20Discussion%20Notes Agenda for this next one: https://wiki.apache.org/cordova/Agenda20140415 > > > > > -Michal > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Jonathan Bond-Caron < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Wed Apr 9 08:40 PM, Brian LeRoux wrote: > > > > > > > > The cons are wrong. You can import plugins and indeed you can test > > > plugins. > > > > The statement that we shouldn't need to compile/transpile is not > > correct > > > if we > > > > want to evolve things. Its the only path we have that will keep > things > > > backwards > > > > compatible. (That we could determine.) > > > > > > I put up an example here: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/gdesolutions/ja-lib/tree/master/tests/plugins/file.encrypt > > > > > > The cons were against the current plugin.xml & <clobbers/>, <merges/> > > > To be clear, it's a pro for using something like browserify. > > > > > > If part of the net benefit is we can have a story like: > > > cordova create plugin file.encrypt > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/gdesolutions/ja-lib/tree/master/tests/plugins/file.encrypt/package.json > > > > > > Extend existing plugin: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/gdesolutions/ja-lib/tree/master/tests/plugins/file.encrypt/LocalFileSystem-es6.js > > > > > > cordova plugin test <--- this (runs in some bleeding edge browser) > > > > > > That's a big win / net benefit for being more opiniated about the > module > > > format. > > > > > > The browserify node.js story looks like: > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/gdesolutions/ja-lib/tree/master/tests/plugins/file.encrypt/LocalFileSystem.js > > > > > > But trying to bring the entire node.js api *into* the browser is a big > > > hack, turning an apple into an orange. > > > > > >
