If we do go down this route, does that mean that we have the opportunity to make certain methods package-private? I honestly think that we expose way too many things right now, and when we set these methods public, it wasn't so that they would be set in stone. I feel that we've totally overextended ourselves by not thinking about this, and now we're stuck with this very poorly designed Java API that we have to maintain.
Also, if we're serious about making a public API, we have to get our test suite working better. We have the JUnit Tests that cover some of the Java use cases, but right now there's parts that just aren't working. I don't know if it's the Android tools that are breaking it or what, but right now certain tests are failing for no good reason. On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> wrote: > Java has really good visibility semantics. I think any symbol that is > public should be a public API, and any symbol we want to be able to change > we should make package-private or private. We're clearly not there atm, but > I think it's quite reasonable to do. > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We should clarify what parts of the native code we can modify at will and >> what would be considered "public APIs" >> >> We don't document DroidGap to any (significant) extent, but we do (now) do >> that for the plugin APIs, and obviously the JS. >> >> On 10/25/12 1:13 PM, "Joe Bowser" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >Hey >> > >> >Can you file a bug in JIRA against this commit so we can track it? I >> >didn't realize that this would break anything significant. I've >> >already modified it so that it should be fixed. The problem that I >> >have with this is that now that we have two places to check for the >> >proper WebViewClient instead of one. The bug that this is fixing is >> >the issue with our WebHistory. CB-1568. >> > >> >Joe >> > >> >On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Bryce Curtis <[email protected]> >> >wrote: >> >> Joe, >> >> >> >> The commit >> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-cordova-android.git;a >> >>=commitdiff;h=6aafd6dc3aec1ed1fe1d7a3e08d73deedddbc3a3 >> >> >> >> changes the signature of a public method >> >> >> >> - public void init(CordovaWebView webView, CordovaWebViewClient >> >> webViewClient, CordovaChromeClient webChromeClient) { >> >> + public void init(CordovaWebView webView, CordovaChromeClient >> >> webChromeClient) { >> >> >> >> which breaks any app that extends DroidGap & calls init with their own >> >> view and chrome clients. >> >> >> >> We really need this support, so could you please revert. >> >> >> >> What is the bug that this was addressing - and maybe there's another >> >> way to solve it? Let me know if Simon or I can help. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Bryce >> >>
