Ya no worries we'll advocate on best for the project vs our particular downstream. File path handling, while tedious, is most certainly not a reason to block a reasonable change.
I think this is reasonable but not convinced it is a win. On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> wrote: > Ah yes, I see what you are asking. The point being that phonegap build > would need to change to work with the new structure. > > Its a fair point, and its important generally to not harm downstream > distributions on purpose, but I think we generally should do whats best for > cordova and give downstream every opportunity to adjust. With this > particular proposal I can only image it would not be a problem, especially > if they use the same tools internally (but the actual phonegap build team > should speak here). > > -Michal > > > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 10:27 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams > <to...@devgeeks.org>wrote: > >> I just mean that build expects config.xml to be in www, yeah? >> >> >> >> On 23/03/2013, at 1:12 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> wrote: >> >> > But isn't the app incomplete without the merges folder? Most apps >> probably >> > don't use it, but for those that do, a zip of www isn't enough, you >> already >> > need to ship more than just the www folder. Creating an app folder would >> > actually make the situation easier I think. >> > >> > project >> > - platforms >> > - .. >> > - plugins >> > - ... >> > - app(s?) >> > - www/ >> > - merges/ >> > - config.xml >> > - README.md >> > - docs/ >> > - etc stuff that doesn't get copied into platform/ output on build >> > >> > >> > (oh, and hey, notice the similarity in structure to plugins? just >> sayin..) >> > >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Tommy-Carlos Williams >> > <to...@devgeeks.org>wrote: >> > >> >> Can I just ask a question about this? >> >> >> >> Is the config.xml supposed to be compatible with build.phonegap.com at >> >> all? >> >> >> >> I ask because I could see a scenario where you might want to use the cli >> >> tools, but still utilise build.phonegap.com for other platforms (or >> even >> >> for the ones supported by the cli). >> >> >> >> If the cli config.xml is "build" compatible, it makes sense for it to be >> >> in the www folder so that the www folder can go straight to >> >> build.phonegap.com. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 23/03/2013, at 9:15 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: >> >> >> >>> I'm ok with ./merges at the same level as ./www but the config.xml >> >>> inside of ./www bugs me too. I think having a root level ./www just >> >>> works well mentally in that its obvious whats there, what it does, and >> >>> who it effects. The ./merges folder is really just stuff that gets >> >>> added to ./www in the right cases so having at the same depth is ok >> >>> (for me). >> >>> >> >>> I get where you are coming from though. >> >>> >> >>> The real sticky bit is a config file hiding with the app >> >>> implementation. It seems like that would live at the root. The idea of >> >>> having it inside of ./www is a simple zip and rename of ./www would >> >>> result in an installable package...but logically with our tooling and >> >>> such that would be a build artifact that just lives in ./platforms >> >>> after we do our magic. >> >>> >> >>> =/ >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> >> >> wrote: >> >>>> Paraphrasing our meeting notes today: >> >>>> >> >>>> * currently www/ has to have config.xml inside it, docs inside it, >> >> README >> >>>> etc >> >>>> * merges folder is already a sibling of www/ but its logically part of >> >> the >> >>>> app. >> >>>> * So, why not move everything that isn't the actual assets of the app >> >>>> itself out of www? >> >>>> * Option 1: move everything out into the root. >> >>>> * harder for git versioning your app, since cordova artifacts >> >>>> (platforms, plugins) are inside. >> >>>> * Option 2: make a new top level "app/" folder that holds merges/ and >> >> www/ >> >>>> and manifestes etc >> >>>> * then you can just clone/install an app into one location >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> And I'll throw out a third option: Create an "apps" folder which can >> >> have >> >>>> any number of named apps, like plugins. >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> I think (2) should be totally doable (just change some default paths >> in >> >> the >> >>>> tooling) and is a strict improvement (minus the hassle of moving your >> >> files >> >>>> around the first time for app devs). (3) I think is interesting, but >> >> is a >> >>>> bit of a departure. >> >>>> >> >>>> -Michal >> >> >> >> >> >>
