+1
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: > So instead of revisiting it just let it die and kick up a new one for web > audio? > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> > wrote: > > So... back to cordova-plugin-media then? > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> exactly! And plugins, I think, will end up being independently > >> versioned so if ppl want old and busted they can have it. =P > >> > >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > SGTM. First step towards deprecation is turning it into a plugin so > that > >> > people can not install it :) > >> > > >> > > >> > On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> I was thinkin we'd just deprecate the media spec altogether for a > >> >> starter/subset of the web audio api (perhaps polyfil the audio > element > >> >> while we're at it). > >> >> > >> >> .... should we kick up a thread about that? > >> >> > >> >> (Added file transfer to the non-spec plugins.) > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Filip Maj <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > Totally makes sense to separate them. > >> >> > > >> >> > File is spec-based, FileTransfer is not. > >> >> > > >> >> > On 2/6/13 10:16 AM, "Andrew Grieve" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> >>I thought FileTransfer was a part of File. Maybe it makes sense to > >> >> >>separate > >> >> >>them though? > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >>On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 12:00 PM, Becky Gibson > >> >> >><[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> >> > >> >> >>> Yes, I shouldn't have confused the issue about audio and media! > I > >> >> >>>guess I > >> >> >>> just get annoyed when I go to mobile spec and it is labelled as > >> "audio" > >> >> >>>:-) > >> >> >>> We can leave it as cordova-plugin-media so it matches the JS api > >> name. > >> >> >>> Although, I think we are creating the same type of confusion if > we > >> >> >>>rename > >> >> >>> capture to media-capture but I don't have a strong opinion on > that. > >> >> >>>Plus, > >> >> >>> I see we are doing that for acceleration and compass as well. I > >> guess > >> >> >>>now > >> >> >>> is as good a time as any to match the W3C names! > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> Also, where is FileTransfer? > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Andrew Grieve < > >> [email protected]> > >> >> >>> wrote: > >> >> >>> > >> >> >>> > Great! I like the spec-based names. I think I have the opposite > >> >> >>>thought > >> >> >>> as > >> >> >>> > Becky. Our current media plugin doesn't follow the WebAudio > spec > >> at > >> >> >>>all. > >> >> >>> > How about we call it cordova-media for now since that's what > it's > >> >> >>>called > >> >> >>> in > >> >> >>> > our docs, and then if we ever implement WebAudio, then we'll > have > >> the > >> >> >>> name > >> >> >>> > available for that. Maybe we should even put it the spec-less > >> >> category > >> >> >>> > (unless there's some older spec that it was based off of?) > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Brian LeRoux <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > Just kicked up a quick wiki page to help vett this. I'm > >> thinking we > >> >> >>> > > try to stay as close to the spec names as possible. > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/Core%20Plugin%20Name%20Proposal > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Becky Gibson > >> >> >>><[email protected]> > >> >> >>> > > wrote: > >> >> >>> > > > My only comment would be about media. Currently it just > >> supports > >> >> >>> audio > >> >> >>> > > so > >> >> >>> > > > perhaps codova-plugin-audio makes more sense and we can > leave > >> >> >>>media > >> >> >>> > open > >> >> >>> > > > for the rewrite. Although, I do realize the api is > labelled > >> >> >>>"media" > >> >> >>> so > >> >> >>> > > > perhaps it would be too confusing to change the repo name. > >> Just > >> >> a > >> >> >>> > > > thought..... > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >>> > > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Andrew Grieve > >> >> >>><[email protected]> > >> >> >>> > > wrote: > >> >> >>> > > > > >> >> >>> > > >> Before I go ahead with this, let's agree upon the repo > names > >> / > >> >> >>>which > >> >> >>> > > >> plugins to include. > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > >> Here's the proposed list: > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > >> Repos to create: > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-accelerometer > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-battery > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-camera > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-capture > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-compass > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-contacts > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-device > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-file > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-geolocation > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-globalization > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-logger > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-media > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-networkstatus > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-notification > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-splashscreen > >> >> >>> > > >> cordova-plugin-inappbrowser > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > >> Note that I have device and network status in this list. > >> Plugins > >> >> >>> that > >> >> >>> > > delay > >> >> >>> > > >> ondeviceready just add themselves to > >> >> >>> channel.deviceReadyChannelsArray. > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > >> Plugins *not* getting their own Repo: > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > >> blackberry/plugin/java/app > >> >> >>> > > >> android/plugin/android/app > >> >> >>> > > >> android/plugin/android/storage > >> >> >>> > > >> errgen/plugin/errgen > >> >> >>> > > >> ios/plugin/ios/console (seems like this should be merged > into > >> >> the > >> >> >>> > logger > >> >> >>> > > >> plugin) > >> >> >>> > > >> windowsphone/plugin/windowsphone/DOMStorage > >> >> >>> > > >> windowsphone/plugin/windowsphone/XHRPatch > >> >> >>> > > >> windowsphone/plugin/windowsphone/console > >> >> >>> > > >> iOS's CDVLocalStorage.m > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > >> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Andrew Grieve > >> >> >>><[email protected] > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> wrote: > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > >> > Great! Sounds like an agreement :). I'll file an INFRA > to > >> get > >> >> >>>them > >> >> >>> > > >> created. > >> >> >>> > > >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:44 PM, Shazron < > [email protected] > >> > > >> >> >>> wrote: > >> >> >>> > > >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> +1 on separate repos. It's the sane choice. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Jesse > >> >> >>><[email protected]> > >> >> >>> > > wrote: > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > +1, I agree on the separate repositories. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > I still contend that nothing should need to be > 'built' > >> and > >> >> >>> there > >> >> >>> > > >> should > >> >> >>> > > >> >> be > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > NO dependencies on the plugins from cordova-js, ( > aside > >> >> from > >> >> >>> > > >> device.js + > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > network.js which are both required pre device ready, > >> and I > >> >> >>> think > >> >> >>> > > >> should > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > remain in the cordova-js repo ) > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Anis KADRI < > >> >> >>> [email protected] > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> wrote: > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > +1 for separate repositories. Should take a bit > longer > >> >> >>>than > >> >> >>> > > normal > >> >> >>> > > >> to > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > package a release but not too long especially if > the > >> >> repos > >> >> >>> are > >> >> >>> > > >> pulled > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > from > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > a local source (ie no network overhead). > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > I'd be ok to ship a set of default plugins and give > >> the > >> >> >>> ability > >> >> >>> > > for > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > people > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > to build their 'own' Cordova. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Brian LeRoux < > >> [email protected] > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > wrote: > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > I'm in favor of discreet plugin repos. It > shouldn't > >> >> >>>effect > >> >> >>> a > >> >> >>> > > >> release > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > if we automate install/remove and add to the Coho > >> >> >>>tool... > >> >> >>> > > though > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > perhaps this is a naive assumption. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Andrew Grieve < > >> >> >>> > > >> [email protected] > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > wrote: > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > Thought it'd be worth having a discussion > around > >> >> >>>whether > >> >> >>> we > >> >> >>> > > >> want a > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > separate > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > repo for each core plugin or not. > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > As far as I can see, we can either have all > core > >> >> >>>plugins > >> >> >>> in > >> >> >>> > > one > >> >> >>> > > >> >> repo, > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > or > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > have each in it's own and call them: > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > cordova-plugin-file > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > cordova-plugin-network > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > cordova-plugin-media > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > etc... > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > I think my preference would be to have them as > >> their > >> >> >>>own > >> >> >>> > > repos > >> >> >>> > > >> so > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > that > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > it > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > will be easier to add/remove lists of plugins > to > >> the > >> >> >>> "which > >> >> >>> > > ones > >> >> >>> > > >> >> are > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > core" > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > list. It will also let us version them > separately > >> (if > >> >> >>>we > >> >> >>> > > want to > >> >> >>> > > >> >> do > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > this). > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > The downside is that it may take longer to > >> perform a > >> >> >>> > release? > >> >> >>> > > >> >> Would > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > we > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > even > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > bundle the plugins with releases anyways > though? > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > -- > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > @purplecabbage > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > risingj.com > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> > >> >> >>> > > >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> > > >> >> >>> > > >> > >> >> >>> > > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >
