Can use both ... .json for npm-like package discovery and .xml for install-time configuration.
On the wp7 pluginstall, I liked the xml format because I essentially just defined an xml fragment that gets appended to the output project file ( also an xml file ) On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think we should stick to it for now. I am totally in favor of using JSON > in the future but right now I would like to see more plugins use this XML > format. > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:51 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > >> ya the past is irrelevant. since we're moving to npm for the pkg mgmt we >> should probably move to an extension of package.json >> >> instead of clobbering andrew's work (and creating work for him) we should >> have a light module in-between that is responsible for marshaling between >> the formats. >> >> this stuff is decidedly not hard but certainly not interesting or fun. >> >> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 9:41 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: >> >> > Probably no reason other than "because Andrew wrote it and that's what he >> > chose" >> > >> > On 10/11/12 3:20 AM, "Mike Reinstein" <reinstein.m...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >If this is an old discussion/argument I'm sorry for re-hashing this. I'm >> > >wondering why express the plugin manifest in xml, when its managed in >> > >node/javascript which handles json natively. There doesn't seem to be >> any >> > >significant nesting or complex XML within the doc thus far. Intentional >> > >design decision? Any info on this would be enlightening and helpful. >> > > >> > >thanks, >> > > >> > >-Mike >> > >> > >> -- @purplecabbage risingj.com
