On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 19:07, Andrew Lunny <[email protected]> wrote: > Some outstanding questions:
- is this for developers of Cordova, developers using Cordova, or both? > Primary audience I was considering was "developers using Cordova" - can/should it be used for custom builds of the native Cordova library? > Sure. For my app, I may not want to pay the size penalty for "built-in" plugins I'm not using. OTOH, this may be a topic for "advanced users". Which may also mean "no one will ever use it". :-) > One goal, based on out past experience with the `droidgap` Ruby script in > particular, should be to minimize external dependencies. I think most of us > are comfortable writing Node.js programs, and Node runs everywhere we want > to run, so I would expect this will be a Node program. For maximum usage, > we should minimize binary Node-add-on dependencies, particularly if they > depend on external libs in the compilation environment (I'm thinking of > libxmljs in particular). > +1 > I would like the program to be compiled into a single binary with Node and > NPM, so we can distribute it ourselves without worrying about the > end-user's environment. This is feasible now, but I believe there is > planned work in Node to turn it from feasible to easy. > Neat. Can you point to some links on this topic? If this will be for building Cordova (the library) as well, we should be > aware of the docs repo, which currently depends on perl, Ruby, and some > libraries for each of those platforms that have to be installed separately. > Not sure at this stage the best way to move forward on that front. > Rebuilding the docs doesn't sound like something a user would do. I'd like to have a single command for the users to use - `cordova` that does most of what they need to do. Things users never need to do, like rebuilding the docs, don't need to be supported by that command. No problem having a single `cordova-dev` command though, that might have a mountain of pre-reqs :-) -- Patrick Mueller http://muellerware.org
