Hi Max,

Thanks for the replies.

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 11:51 PM, Max Waterman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 18/01/14 09:20, Max Waterman wrote:
>>
>> 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?
>
>
> I see they made a README.md file that seems to have the appropriate
> instructions (and I contributed instructions for the bash script)...
>
> <https://github.com/crosswalk-project/crosswalk-demos>
>
> I still think it all needs bit of work, but I don't think there's any
> misunderstanding about the manifest of icon files, per your original email.
> If it doesn't work, then it's actually a bug in something and needs to be
> fixed.
>
> Max.


Sorry for the delay in replying to the list. You helped us a lot to
clear this up.
So, in summary, yes, the apps are fine, I believe it is the way
crosswalk-demos is being "assembled" what is wrong. As you said, they
probably use git submodules to make src/ point to another repository
and copy the manifest.json to the app root folder. That is what was
misleading us.

Since we were always using crosswalk-demos for testing, we made our
manifest parser to always append
"src/" to the icon_path. When testing with both WGT and XPK packages,
we saw that the former had a proper
path on its manifest while the latter had just the filename. That
blocked us from merging the tool because we didn't know what was the
correct behavior for this.

I will talk to the people behind crosswalk-demos so they fix it, but
for now we fixed our tool to consider exactly what the manifest file
gives us.

Thanks for the help.

Best regards,
jesus



>
>
>>
>> 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
_______________________________________________
Crosswalk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev

Reply via email to