> > Augh! This actually made it past the mailing list. :( ...
> +1 for the dislike :P but users will tell us if they like having 12 scripts > laying around. They are only assigned issues. If you guys have concerns, bring them up. There is little point in committing to work if it isn't valuable to our users. On that note, Benn and I noticed a recent issue with the `run` command. Since `run` will implicitly build an application, it must accept the build mode flag `--debug` or `--release`. In other words, it should accept all parameters that `build` accepts and forward the valid ones to the `build` command. This should be true for any high-level command. Anyone have input on the `run` command? Once settled, we'll update the Wiki and issue details. Michael On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 for the dislike :P but users will tell us if they like having 12 scripts > laying around. > > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Augh! This actually made it past the mailing list. :( > > > > I hate this idea for the emulators and devices, because this is a set > > of extremely complex script that has next to zero payoff for our > > users. I really wish I paid more attention to this thread earlier on, > > because I really don't like these scripts. I guess it's too late to > > vote a -1 against these, and I guess it's my fault for ignoring things > > I really dislike. > > > > Joe > > > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > FYI issues for all of these scripts have been filed. > > > > > > On 3/28/13 1:31 PM, "Michael Brooks" <mich...@michaelbrooks.ca> wrote: > > > > > >>Fil, great work on the wiki document. Below are some feedback points. > > >> > > >> > > >>> `build` > > >> > > >>... > > >> > > >>What happens when a user specifies both --debug and --release? > > >> > > >> > > >>I'm happy as long as we decide on what happens. For the sake of ease, I > > >>think it would be better to just fail. > > >> > > >>This brings up the question of exit codes. I don't want to over > engineer, > > >>but should we distinguish between an exit code for an "unsupported > > >>command" > > >>and "runtime command error" (e.g. unsupported argument combination)? As > > >>long as there is a message with the exit code, it's not necessary but > > >>could > > >>provide a good hint to higher-level tools. > > >> > > >>`run [--target=<id>]` > > >> > > >> > > >>I like the term `run` and how it will implicitly invokes `build` when > > >>necessary. This will be the go-to command for most developers. > > >> > > >>`list-emulator-images` > > >>> ... > > >>> `list-started-emulators` > > >>> ... > > >>> `list-devices` > > >> > > >> > > >>The listing format is: "ID: DESCRIPTION". What will it look like when > no > > >>description is provided? "ID" or "ID:"? > > >> > > >>Is it possible to remove the colon entirely and delimit on a space? "ID > > >>DESCRIPTION" and "ID" > > >> > > >>`deploy-emulator` > > >>> ... > > >>> `deploy-device` > > >> > > >> > > >>Deploy is a confusing term because it's too similar to "run." Even both > > >>command definitions use the term "deploy." > > >> > > >>I'd like to propose renaming the deploy commands to: `install-emulator` > > >>and > > >>`install-device`. > > >> > > >>Install more clearly describes the action and implies that it does not > > >>implicitly build first. > > >> > > >>Again, awesome work Fil! > > >>Michael > > >> > > >>On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Thanks Shaz, updated the wiki article. > > >>> > > >>> On 3/26/13 4:07 PM, "Shazron" <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> >* log is only the Simulator > > >>> >* build release/debug -- last one clobbers? depending on how the > > >>>parsing > > >>> >is > > >>> >implemented > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> >On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > > >>> > > > >>> >> OK, I've done some rehash of the proposal and put it up on the > wiki: > > >>> >> http://wiki.apache.org/cordova/CommandLineToolingDesign > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Please take a look and post back if you have questions, > > disagreement, > > >>> >>want > > >>> >> to +1 it, etc. > > >>> >> > > >>> >> At the top there is a generic multi-device flow that can solve a > lot > > >>>of > > >>> >> the consistency issues we've seen before. > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Assuming this proposal is on track, there are three outstanding > > >>> >>questions. > > >>> >> > > >>> >> Two for the `log` command: > > >>> >> > > >>> >> * Does the current iOS implementation only work for simulator, or > > >>> >>device, > > >>> >> or either, or neither? > > >>> >> * Does the multi-device flow apply correctly to the log case? It > > >>>seems > > >>> >> identifying whether the user's Cordova application is running on > an > > >>> >> emulator or device target would need to be figured out. > > >>> >> > > >>> >> One about the build command: > > >>> >> > > >>> >> * What happens when a user specifies both --release and --debug, > > I.e. > > >>> >> `build --release --debug`? > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> On 3/25/13 1:54 PM, "Michael Brooks" <mich...@michaelbrooks.ca> > > >>>wrote: > > >>> >> > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> To be absolutely clear, the above is NOT the motivation for > > >>>changing > > >>> >> >>this > > >>> >> >> stuff around. Cordova-cli needs consistency across platforms. > > >>>This is > > >>> >> >>the > > >>> >> >> motivation. > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> >Yep, as long as we can guarantee that each script follows a > > >>>predictable > > >>> >> >input and output, I don't care how we implement it. > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> >If you guys really want a single entry-point with flags, then go > > >>>nuts, > > >>> >>but > > >>> >> >we will need to clearly define what happens when: > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > - no flag is provided e.g. `build` > > >>> >> > - multiple flags are provided e.g. `build --release --debug` > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> >--- > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> >+1 to adding a script that validates a platform's SDK > requirements. > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> >This script should not need to modify project files to assert the > > >>>SDK > > >>> >> >requirements. I mention this because the current `cordova-cli` > > >>>Android > > >>> >> >`check_requirements` must successfully update the Android project > > >>> >>target > > >>> >> >before returning true. However, consider the scenario where you > > >>> >>validate > > >>> >> >the SDK before adding the platform - in this case, the Android > > >>> >> >`check_requirements` will always fail. > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> >Michael > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> >On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> > wrote: > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> >Hopefully, next time we will change/update these things it > will > > >>>be > > >>> >>for > > >>> >> >>a > > >>> >> >> >real reason (such as SDK tools updates etc...) and not because > > we > > >>> >>think > > >>> >> >> >that there might be a better implementation in C#. > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> To be absolutely clear, the above is NOT the motivation for > > >>>changing > > >>> >> >>this > > >>> >> >> stuff around. Cordova-cli needs consistency across platforms. > > >>>This is > > >>> >> >>the > > >>> >> >> motivation. > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > > >>> > > > > > >
