Sounds good to me.
Faster CI is better CI

On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 2:16 PM Jan Piotrowski <piotrow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> None of the plugins have a `hooks` directory or anything else that
> looks similar.
>
> Is anyone aware of any script in the plugin repositories that is
> executed on the developer side?
>
> Otherwise I think we should be good to define adding and dropping
> Node.js versions as non-breaking for plugins.
>
> Best,
> Jan
>
> Am Sa., 11. Mai 2019 um 10:49 Uhr schrieb <raphine...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Sounds like a good idea under the premise that our plugins really do not
> > contain any scripts that
> > are executed on the developer machine.
> >
> > But aren't there any core plugins that define hooks?
> >
> > Am Sa., 11. Mai 2019 um 10:03 Uhr schrieb Jan Piotrowski <
> > piotrow...@gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Currently our plugin CI uses the same version of Node.js as Tooling
> > > and Platforms, until recently 4.2 and now 6.
> > >
> > > But if I am not mistaken, our plugins do not contain any scripts that
> > > are executed on the developer machine, only JavaScript files that are
> > > run inside the app or native code. So it doesn't really matter what
> > > node version is used to run our plugin CI tests as it doesn't run any
> > > actual scripts (vs. with platforms, we have scripts that are actually
> > > run by the developer).
> > >
> > > Could we maybe just go to node 10 or 12 with our plugins right now?
> > >
> > > This would give as quite some time until we have to update our CI
> > > configuration again, and possibly also quicker installs and builds.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Jan
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cordova.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cordova.apache.org
> > >
> > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cordova.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cordova.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to