On 18/01/14 05:24, Jesus Sanchez-Palencia wrote:
Hi,
on the regard of where we store icons in our XPK packages, it came to
our attention today that all the packages we have seen so far are
probably wrong. (or at least wrongly defined on their manifest).
Let's use HangOnMan [1] as an example, so we can settle this now. Its
manifest file [2] says:
Looking at this a bit more closely...
"icons": {
"16": "icon_16.png",
"48": "icon_64.png",
"128": "icon_128.png"
},
and we can find those icon files inside this app's src/ folder.
This src folder is the root of the git submodule, and is the root of the
app.
IINM, the python script should package the app based on that root, and
the package shouldn't have any 'src/' directory in it all.
Did you package/build the apps at all?
Am I missing something (else)?
Max.
However, after having a look at how both Chrome apps [3] and W3C
Widgets Spec [4] are handling this, we can see that they provide icon
paths rather just icon names, since an app root is always where the
manifest file sits.
In other words, for our XPK packages the manifest should say:
"icons": {
"16": "src/icon_16.png",
"48": "src/icon_64.png",
"128": "src/icon_128.png"
},
This has just blocked us from merging a tool capable of correctly
installing both WGT and XPK packages on Tizen.
I believe we should fix all of our manifest files now so we don't
propagate this issue any further. What do you think?
[1] https://github.com/crosswalk-project/crosswalk-demos/tree/master/HangOnMan
[2]
https://github.com/crosswalk-project/crosswalk-demos/blob/master/HangOnMan/manifest.json
[3] http://developer.chrome.com/apps/manifest/icons.html
[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#icons
Cheers,
jesus
_______________________________________________
Crosswalk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev
_______________________________________________
Crosswalk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev
