Great idea Joe. I've got a Samsung Galaxy S running 2.3.5 so lemme know when it is up.
But wait, isn't this a job for the PhoneGap Device Wall! http://phonegap.com/2012/03/29/phonegaps-new-device-wall/ Simon Mac Donald http://hi.im/simonmacdonald On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: > OK, I published a test app on Google Play. I'll post the link once it > actually shows up. I want people to download and run it on their Android > 2.3 devices to see if we can find any that crash! If so, it'll be recorded > in the Error Report. That way we can finally know is this is a real bug or > something that only exists in the Emulator. > > I'll throw up the code on a repo somewhere as well. I made sure to use > zero permissions so that it's clear what the app is. (I bet it gets really > crap ratings!). > > Joe > > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: > >> +1 science >> >> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Bryce Curtis <[email protected] >> >wrote: >> > >> >> Yes, I meant providing your own classes that inherit from our >> >> CordovaChrome/WebView classes. >> >> >> >> From what I've observed recently, addJavascriptInterface is still >> broken in >> >> the emulator and on some (maybe small subset) of real phones. >> >> >> > >> > I just tested it on the emulator. However, I don't think this is an >> issue >> > on real phones. When they wrote the switch, it was meant to allow >> Android >> > 2.3 to run on crap like the Quench. So far, I have never seen a phone >> that >> > has less than 256 MB of RAM produced, not even the HTC Wildfire (and that >> > phone sucked!). I honestly don't think that there's a single Android 2.3 >> > phone that has this bug. >> > >> > I think I'm going to release an application to prove this point. FOR >> > SCIENCE! >> > >> > Joe >> > >> > >> >> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:09 PM, Bryce Curtis <[email protected] >> >> > >wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > I really haven't had time to look at this in detail, but agree that >> >> > > anything related to the webview should be in CordovaWebView. As Fil >> >> > > mentioned, that includes the history, plugin manager, whitelisting, >> & >> >> > > authentication + callback server. >> >> > > >> >> > > I assume that overriding chrome/view clients so the user can specify >> >> > their >> >> > > own will still work. >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > What do you mean overriding Chrome/View clients? You can use your own >> >> > classes if they inherit from the CordovaChrome class or CordovaWebView >> >> > class, but if you just cram a vanilla WebViewClient or >> WebChromeClient, >> >> > Cordova won't work at all. This has nothing to do with >> CordovaWebView, >> >> but >> >> > instead is a consequence of the prompt hack that acts as our current >> >> > bridge. If we want to make it so that we're not dependent on the >> >> > ChromeClient, we should probably bring back addJavascriptInterface and >> >> put >> >> > it in the view itself. >> >> > >> >> > BTW: Does the emulator still break when we do this on Android 2.3? I >> >> think >> >> > I'll have to look into that. >> >> > >> >> > Joe >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:17 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > > Sorry for late reply Joe! >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Looks great! As for outstanding issues as per your wiki article >> [1], >> >> I >> >> > > > would say move everything WebView related, as well as >> >> Cordova-specific >> >> > > > such as the plugin manager, into CordovaWebView.java. My thinking >> >> here >> >> > is >> >> > > > that, none of scaffolding necessary to enable device APIs in the >> web >> >> > view >> >> > > > should be a burden on the user - the CordovaWebView class should >> >> handle >> >> > > > all of that. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > It separates the cordova-y bits as something the WEbView needs to >> >> > manage >> >> > > > on its own, as well, and cleans up the final Activity-extending >> class >> >> > to >> >> > > > be simpler. Our end users should not have to worry about that >> stuff, >> >> > nor >> >> > > > do they need to see it in their own activities, or the generated >> >> > > > activities the baseline tooling within cordova-android provides. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > IMO: history, plugin manager, whitelisting, authentication, should >> >> all >> >> > be >> >> > > > handled by CordovaWebView. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > [1] http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CordovaWebView >> >> > > > >> >> > > > On 3/28/12 4:06 PM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >BUMP! Are we all on board with doing this? >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >Joe >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> Hey >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> I've been working on the CordovaWebView branch, and I think we >> >> need >> >> > to >> >> > > > >> discuss where to put the CallbackServer and PluginManager in >> the >> >> new >> >> > > > >> implementation. I'm OK with it being in the view, but I did >> have >> >> it >> >> > > in >> >> > > > >>the >> >> > > > >> Client before, and I'm wondering what people's thoughts are on >> >> that. >> >> > > > >>Also, >> >> > > > >> since these are core pieces of Cordova on Android, this may >> break >> >> > the >> >> > > > >> branch, which is fine, but it'd be good if more people looked >> at >> >> > this >> >> > > > >> branch, and discussed how this should work. >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cordova-android.git;a >> >> > > > >>=shortlog;h=refs/heads/CordovaWebView >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CordovaWebView >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> Joe >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >>
