re: the scoped package id, I like it, but not sure we want to change them again ... and how much of our existing world will it break. Can we install an '@' id currently on all platforms? It will result in a www/plugins/@cordova/plugin-device/ folder right now, won't it?
re: other questions Personally, I would rather see only committers able to publish to our scope (assuming we go that way), just like we wanted to prevent non committers from using org.apache.cordova namespace. I considered 'cordova plugin add device' awhile back, I was going to do it directly in plugman, but I decided against it. Currently it would mean a 3rd attempt to find the plugin over http; 1) cpr, 2) npm, 3)munge name and go back to npm By this time, I think I would just ask the user what they really want. We could also do this via cordova-registry-mapper aliases. @purplecabbage risingj.com On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Parashuram N (MS OPEN TECH) < panar...@microsoft.com> wrote: > Scopes are like namespaces. In the reverse domain name world, > org.apache.cordova was considered a namespace, right ? > > We did not want non core packages to publish to that namespace, so does > the same argument apply ? > > Alternatively, we can think of scope as packages that apply to a > particular environment - for example, all cordova packages would be > @cordova scope. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michal Mocny [mailto:mmo...@google.com] > Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 2:03 PM > To: dev > Subject: Re: Scoped package names for npm? > > Other questions to answer: > - Can 3rd-parties publish to this scope? > - Do we want them to? > - Do we want to default to @cordova scope if none is provided, such that > you could do `cordova plugin add device`? > > -Michal > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@google.com> wrote: > > > https://docs.npmjs.com/getting-started/scoped-packages > > > > Should we be @cordova/plugin-device instead of cordova-plugin-device? > > > > -Michal > > >
