On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 8:52 AM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > +1 unbundle. The reason we added it in was that it fixes issues with > > Android's built-in networking stack. It was added pre-plugin-breakout, > and > > was never broken out into its own plugin. > > > > > Because CordovaResourceApi is a core API. > Sorry, I was referring to OkHttp here, not CordovaResourceApi. > > > > The good news is that I think it'll be quite straight-forward to extract > it > > out. We don't expose OkHttp interfaces anywhere, and instead exposed it > > through CordovaResourceApi via createHttpConnection() (which returns a > > HttpURLConnection, not an OkHttp interface). > > > > > How many plugins depend on this functionality? > No idea. File Transfer does. My point though is that we can remove OkHttp without changing the signature of this function. We can just return the system default HTTPURLConnection. > > > > The grey area is whether we'd want the FileTransfer plugin to depend on > > OkHttp, or whether we just have FileTransfer be flakey on pre-KitKat > > devices if devs don't choose to add the plugin. I think I'd be in the > camp > > of adding it by default, but then allow it to be removed via "plugin rm". > > Our tools don's support that right now though. > > > > I don't think this is a grey area. We could move this in the plugin, but > this is an API change. Can you create a feature branch off 4.0.x with > this? > Definitely don't want to bundle it with FileTransfer in case another plugin also wants to use OkHttp. We'd need it to be its own plugin. This work is unfortunately not on my radar to work on in the near term. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 8:51 AM, Marcel Kinard <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > I agree it would be cleaner to not embed okhttp in Cordova. > > > > > > If it is removed, what do you see as the user experience? Does the CLI > > > automatically download the okhttpd jar from square's github? Or do we > > > expect the user to do that manually and drop it in a lib folder? > > > > > > Would it be possible to have the Apache httpd client take the place of > > > okhttp, or are there okhttp-specific functions being used? > > > > > > On Sep 29, 2014, at 5:16 PM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hey > > > > > > > > Can we unbundle okhttp without breaking Cordova? I think that our > > > bundling > > > > has become a serious problem, and we should find a way to abstract > the > > > > dependency away somehow into a plugin and should do this in 4.0.x. > > > > > > > > Ian, anyone else who knows what's going on with File/URIs? What's > your > > > > thoughts on this? > > > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > > > >
