Given the state of some of our plugins, dropping the distinguishing namespace might be a good thing :P
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Horn, Julian C <julian.c.h...@intel.com> wrote: > I am also against another rename. These name changes are very costly and > disruptive. > > There is code in several places that assumes that you can enumerate the > plugins selected by a project by enumerating the subdirectories of plugins. > If you allow a plugin root folder to be more than a single directory, > like "@cordova/plugin-device" then you break that code. > > Also, please remember that when you rename a plugins, you require people > to update every <dependency> tag that refers to that plugin, unless you > want to rely on the rename machinery forever. > > Julian > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven Gill [mailto:stevengil...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 9:42 PM > To: dev@cordova.apache.org > Subject: Re: Scoped package names for npm? > > I also like scoped packages but am against another rename. Haha. > > I know organizations are coming soon so we will be able to create the > Cordova organization and I believe scope packages that way. Add PMC members > to the organization to be able to publish instead of relying on a Cordova > npm user account. > > Lets wait and see how it goes. > On Apr 20, 2015 2:29 PM, "Jesse" <purplecabb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cordova.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cordova.apache.org > >