So, I've been on about having this and tools like this for some time. I think it'd be best if we continue w/ the intention of getting there by way of a set of small tools that are purpose built before composing into 'one tool to rule them all'.
On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Patrick Mueller <[email protected]> wrote: > 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
