Just tried some symlinks in Xcode 5: - Copying assets work (due to our custom build step) - Building works (compiler follows links just fine) - Editing a fail (big fail. Files open but changes cannot be saved.)
For Xcode though, it is an option to change our installation step to have Xcode reference the native files within plugins/ rather than within platforms/. Symlinks in Eclipse: - Copying assets works out-of-the-box - Build works fine - Editing seems to work fine (edits saved to symlinked location). Still though, maybe the best solution would be a combination of the two? Have prepare know when an remove+add is necessary? On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> wrote: > Have we not previously solved the symlink problem in xcode with a build > hook, or was that for prepare step? > > The --link concept doesn't do anything for that platforms -> plugins file > mapping. Its useful for mapping plugins/ to local source, but it doesn't > help with the problem Tyler mentions, right? > > -Michal > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Braden Shepherdson <bra...@chromium.org > >wrote: > > > Symlinks in platforms/ are a problem because Xcode doesn't honour them, > at > > least last time we tried it. > > > > I'm much more enthused about the --link concept than any syncing, though. > > Also if someone wants to sync, they can already use rsync to do it > > manually. > > > > Braden > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 11:45 AM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org > > >wrote: > > > > > I think it'd be good to enumerate our options for workflow before we > > > decided on which to implement (or maybe choose multiple). > > > > > > Tyler's idea about a sync command seems like it would be handy. Edit > your > > > plugin files within platforms/, and then run `cordova plugin > copychanges > > > org.my.plugin` to do a reverse copy of the source files back to the > > install > > > source location of the plugin. Big caveat though is that you run the > risk > > > of prepare clobbering your changes. I think that's too killer a risk. > > > > > > Another thought is that we could use symlinks when running prepare. > Have > > > files within platforms/ symlink to files within plugins/, then symlink > > > again back to their original sources. Would this work with editors in > > > practice? I don't know, but worth exploring. Wikipedia says symlinks > work > > > on NTFS as of Vista. > > > > > > Braden / Michael - I think yours is a good idea as well. Although, I > > don't > > > think we should encourage people to edit files within plugins/. They > > should > > > edit their plugins from install point. We should record the install > path, > > > and maybe have prepare have a prepare --update-local-plugins. > > > > > > Any other ideas? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Michael Sierra <msie...@adobe.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Can you please file JIRAs on doc problems like this? Existing > > overview > > > > doc says you can use the CLI to bootstrap & hand off to an SDK & > > > supporting > > > > platform command-line utilities. I take your comment to mean doc > > should > > > > better stress that once you start working with platform tools > > downstream, > > > > you can't go back to the CLI. Correct? > > > > > > > > --Mike Sierra > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > > From: Tyler Wilson [twil...@pulse-robotics.com] > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2013 8:19 PM > > > > To: dev@cordova.apache.org > > > > Subject: Re: Updating plugin code on prepare > > > > > > > > Re: IDEs: if it is the case that the CLI should not be used along > with > > an > > > > IDE, perhaps the documentation - including Getting Started Guides, > > etc. - > > > > ought to be much clearer about this. Perhaps a big warning that > "Xcode > > > > project files are created by the CLI, but they should not be opened > and > > > > used by Xcode. And you definitely should not edit code within the > IDE". > > > > > > > > I just went to the main documentation site here - > > > > > > > > > > http://cordova.apache.org/docs/en/3.0.0/guide_overview_index.md.html#Overview-anditappears > it only mentions the new CLI interface. No mention of the > > > > old bin/create method. Seems to me there may be communication problem > > > here. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Tyler > > > > > > > > On Sep 26, 2013, at 6:11 PM, Anis KADRI <anis.ka...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > @purplecabbage: I have the same workflow but I think the proposed > > > > > solution is a step in the right direction. It would allow us to > > easily > > > > > develop platform plugins without having to delete project/create > > > > > project/install plugin/uninstall plugin constantly. The plugin > would > > > > > be packaged (plugin.xml) from day 1 and one can only focus on > > > > > development. > > > > > > > > > > As far as IDEs, the answer is simple. You should not use IDEs and > > > > > cordova-cli at the same time. Until IDEs are aware of cordova-cli > > > > > there is no point in creating projects with cordova-cli because > > > > > everything gets blown on every build. I am not even sure we can > make > > > > > Xcode aware of cordova-cli. We've already talked about this prior > to > > > > > the 3.0 release and that is why we have the create scripts and > > plugman > > > > > approach. You should not be using cordova-cli either if you're > doing > > > > > some custom native dev that can't be pluginized (changing the main > > > > > Activity.java or AppDelegate.m or whatever). If you're using > > > > > cordova-cli just to create a project and then open an IDE to > develop, > > > > > you're probably doing it wrong. You should be creating a native > > > > > project and using plugman instead. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 9:01 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org > > > > > > wrote: > > > > >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >>> What does a watch mean? > > > > >>> - if I reboot, is it still watched? > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >> No, this would start a process that lives until you CTRL+C. You > > could > > > > have > > > > >> it run it in the background, or set it to start of startup, but > that > > > > would > > > > >> be using local system tools, not part of the command itself. > > > > >> > > > > >> Ideally, "watch" should run "prepare" whenever you would have > wanted > > > it > > > > to. > > > > >> Though obviously that cannot be perfect, it can be a useful tool > > when > > > > >> iterating. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> I think it would be best to consider separating development from > > > > packaging > > > > >>> in your use-case for workflow. > > > > >>> If I am going to develop featureX as a plugin I would : > > > > >>> > > > > >>> 1. create a project for a single cordova platform, and develop > the > > > > feature > > > > >>> as a native piece, and a js piece. > > > > >>> 2. test thoroughly > > > > >>> 3. create a project for a second cordova platform, and develop > the > > > > native > > > > >>> bit, preserving the js from 1 > > > > >>> 4. test thoroughly > > > > >>> 5. repeat steps 3+4 for any remaining platforms > > > > >>> 6. package featureX as a plugin by organizing relevant bits in > the > > > > correct > > > > >>> folder structure, and adding a plugin.xml > > > > >>> 7. test each platform by installing with plugman > > > > >>> 8. publish > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >> As a plugin developer, that is not my workflow. > > > > >> > > > > >> Typically for me its: > > > > >> > > > > >> Write a sample app/manual test for some new feature that isn't > > > > implemented > > > > >> yet. > > > > >> Create a new plugin Foo for iOS & Android, and stub the > > > implementation. > > > > >> Implement feature A of plugin Foo for iOS, test, add it for > Android, > > > > test. > > > > >> Implement feature B of plugin Foo for iOS, test, add it for > Android, > > > > test. > > > > >> ... > > > > >> > > > > >> Usually the js implementation is shared, the auto tests are > shared, > > > and > > > > the > > > > >> sample test app is shared. > > > > >> > > > > >> Sure, I do platform specific stuff for testing and implementation, > > > but I > > > > >> certainly wouldn't say I do plugin development in platform > > isolation. > > > > >> > > > > >> Also, right now we do not have a "plugin create" command, and so > > > leaving > > > > >> the "packaging" step for last doesn't add affect total work. But > > once > > > > we > > > > >> do have such a command, plugins could start packaged, and adding > the > > > > small > > > > >> changes to plugin.xml as you need them is likely a good way to go. > > > > >> > > > > >> Finally, this workflow would get people out of the habit of making > > > > changes > > > > >> to the platform artifacts directly. I'm not sure that can be > > entirely > > > > >> avoided in all cases, but why shouldn't we work towards making > that > > > > easier? > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>> We seem to have this notion come up repeatedly that our users + > > > plugin > > > > >>> developers are working on multiple platforms at the same time, > > which > > > I > > > > >>> think is entirely false. > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >> Since we differ in opinion, how can we put this to the test? > > > > >> > > > > >> Also, we specifically make sure all our features address the needs > > of > > > > those > > > > >> doing single platform development, so in a world of 3.0+ cli, I > > really > > > > >> don't see how we can not do the same to address the needs of those > > who > > > > do > > > > >> do multi-platform development, especially when we have a good > > proposal > > > > of > > > > >> how to do so and someone willing to do it. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>> I also think we're trying to help the wrong people; If I am a > > > > developer who > > > > >>> is working on multiple platforms at once, and I have a bunch of > > > devices > > > > >>> attached, I probably also have the skills to set up my own grunt > > > > continuous > > > > >>> integration system. Setting up tooling for potential plugin > > > developers > > > > is > > > > >>> the wrong approach, imho. We should actually just go and > implement > > > > some new > > > > >>> plugin and evaluate the process instead of creating and imposing > a > > > > specific > > > > >>> workflow. > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > >> The first part of this argument has some merit, I agree. We the > > > > >> power-users have found ways to address our problems. However, I > > think > > > > that > > > > >> with this change it means that even the end user can make changes > to > > > > plugin > > > > >> folder as they find bugs/etc, and expect to see the change > reflected > > > > after > > > > >> running prepare. This is principle of least surprise, and just > good > > > > design. > > > > >> > > > > >> I also don't think we are imposing any specific workflow here, > just > > > > >> enabling a new one. Personally I think that its quite surprising > > and > > > > >> embarrassing that we haven't enabled this workflow since 3.0. > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> @purplecabbage > > > > >>> risingj.com > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> > wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> I love the idea of a watch command. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Anis KADRI < > anis.ka...@gmail.com > > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>>> Forgot about the existence of --link for a second. I think this > > is > > > a > > > > >>>>> good solution (not temporary). watch can be an enhancement to > > this > > > > >>>>> solution. This might get people like Joe Bowser and other > people > > > who > > > > >>>>> do native dev to give cordova-cli a try (only maybe though). > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Braden Shepherdson < > > > > >>> bra...@chromium.org > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>> If the proposal above is temporary, what's permanent? cordova > > > watch? > > > > >>> I > > > > >>>>> want > > > > >>>>>> to make sure we're on the same page. > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> Braden > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 6:08 AM, Anis KADRI < > > anis.ka...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> No I didn't mean implement `plugman --watch`. I don't think > > > plugman > > > > >>>>>>> needs a `watch` command. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> I was indeed talking about `cordova watch` which should watch > > for > > > > >>>>>>> changes in plugins/ (and maybe in merges/ and www/ as well) > and > > > > >>> update > > > > >>>>>>> the platform projects (prepare?) on every change. I am happy > > to > > > > >>> know > > > > >>>>>>> that it's on the wish list. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> As far as the original proposal, I believe it is a descent > > > > temporary > > > > >>>>>>> solution for plugin developers who want to use cordova-cli. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Michal Mocny < > > > mmo...@chromium.org > > > > > > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>> Braden, thats has been on the wish list (cordova watch), > but I > > > > >>>> suspect > > > > >>>>>>> Anis > > > > >>>>>>>> was suggesting something different with plugman --watch, to > do > > > > >>>>>>> specifically > > > > >>>>>>>> with plugin development. Am I right, Anis? How does your > > idea > > > > >>>>> compare > > > > >>>>>>>> with using --link with cordova watch? Would plugman --watch > > be > > > > >>>> useful > > > > >>>>>>> for > > > > >>>>>>>> non cli projects? > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> -Michal > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Braden Shepherdson < > > > > >>>>>>> bra...@chromium.org>wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> We've had a vague feature planned for a while now to do a > > > cordova > > > > >>>>>>> watch. It > > > > >>>>>>>>> would watch your plugins/, www/, and merges/* for any > > changes. > > > If > > > > >>>> any > > > > >>>>>>>>> changes are detected, it would re-run cordova prepare, so > > that > > > > >>> your > > > > >>>>>>> native > > > > >>>>>>>>> projects are always up-to-date. > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> I'm open to checking (hashes?) which files have changed and > > > which > > > > >>>>> have > > > > >>>>>>> not, > > > > >>>>>>>>> but hashing them all is touching them all anyway, and it > > might > > > be > > > > >>>>> faster > > > > >>>>>>>>> for small files to just copy them instead of checking > first. > > > > >>> We'll > > > > >>>>> have > > > > >>>>>>> to > > > > >>>>>>>>> try it and see; for v1 I'm going with the simple option of > > > > >>> copying > > > > >>>>>>>>> everything. > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Braden > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Michal Mocny < > > > > >>> mmo...@chromium.org > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> The idea for plugin dev outside of plugins/ folder was to > > use > > > > >>>>> "plugin > > > > >>>>>>> add > > > > >>>>>>>>>> --link". Matter of fact, braden suggested that "plugin > > > create" > > > > >>>>> should > > > > >>>>>>>>>> default to --link-ing to some external location so that > you > > > > >>> don't > > > > >>>>> risk > > > > >>>>>>>>>> deleting your only copy inside plugins/. (I personally > > don't > > > > >>>> think > > > > >>>>>>>>> thats a > > > > >>>>>>>>>> necessary concern, but I think its a conversation for > > later). > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I'm not even sure what a 'watch' would do, just uninstall > & > > > > >>>> install > > > > >>>>>>> each > > > > >>>>>>>>>> time the plugin changes? I think that ends up being just > > > > >>>> slightly > > > > >>>>>>> worse > > > > >>>>>>>>>> than the current proposal if you factor in that we already > > do > > > > >>>>> support > > > > >>>>>>>>>> --link (except without the above change its been useless). > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> However, we may still want some form of 'watch' command > for > > > > >>> devs > > > > >>>>> using > > > > >>>>>>>>>> plugman directly. I had assumed that those devs just edit > > in > > > > >>>>> place, > > > > >>>>>>>>> since > > > > >>>>>>>>>> they don't use a prepare step anyway. > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> -Michal > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 7:50 AM, Anis KADRI < > > > > >>>> anis.ka...@gmail.com> > > > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> If we're talking about developing plugins inside the > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> plugins/org.myplugin.id folder than I think it's a great > > > > >>>>> workflow > > > > >>>>>>> and > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> I would just hide the cached version of plugin.xml inside > > > > >>> that > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> plugins/org.myplugin.id folder. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> However, if you're developing a plugin outside of a > cordova > > > > >>> CLI > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> project, I think a `watch` (and add --watch) command is > > more > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> appropriate. One of the reasons you would develop a > plugin > > > > >>>>> outside > > > > >>>>>>> of > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> a cordova CLI project is for easier version control (each > > > > >>>> plugin > > > > >>>>>>> would > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> have its own repository). The other cool thing about > > `watch` > > > > >>> is > > > > >>>>> that > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> it would copy the files that have actually changed and > not > > > > >>>>>>> everything > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> (some plugins have a LOT of files [1]). > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/phonegap/phonegap-facebook-plugin > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 3:30 AM, James Jong < > > > > >>>>> wjamesj...@gmail.com> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> +1 This is a cleaner workflow and should reduce some > > > > >>>> confusion. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> -James Jong > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 24, 2013, at 3:09 PM, Michal Mocny < > > > > >>>> mmo...@chromium.org > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just to add, the reason for the "if" statement in step > > (2) > > > > >>>> is > > > > >>>>>>> that > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> uninstall & reinstall take a lot longer than just > moving > > a > > > > >>>> few > > > > >>>>>>>>> files, > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> which > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> is the 99.9% case for most end users who aren't making > > > > >>>>>>> modifications > > > > >>>>>>>>>> to > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> plugins. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> This way, we only do the heavy lifting if your plugin > > > > >>>>> structure > > > > >>>>>>>>>> actually > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> changed. Doing it automatically means we no longer > have > > > > >>> to > > > > >>>>>>> advise > > > > >>>>>>>>>> users > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> that making edits inside plugin/ folder is useless. > Now > > > > >>> we > > > > >>>>> just > > > > >>>>>>>>>> advise > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> them to run "prepare" after making changes to either > www/ > > > > >>> or > > > > >>>>>>>>> plugins/. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> This key insight was Braden's idea and I think its just > > an > > > > >>>>>>> awesome > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> change > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> for workflow. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> -Michal > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 2:58 PM, Braden Shepherdson < > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> bra...@chromium.org>wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Michal and I were discussing how to make the plugin > > > > >>>> developer > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> experience > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> better, by having `cordova prepare` update the > platform > > > > >>>>> projects > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> properly > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> when you change a plugin in place. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I propose the following changes: > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. On plugin install, we cache the plugin.xml in > > > > >>>>>>> $PROJECT/.cordova > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> somewhere. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. On 'cordova prepare', compare each plugin's > > plugin.xml > > > > >>>>>>> against > > > > >>>>>>>>> the > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cached one. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> a. If they have changed, uninstall the plugin using > > > > >>> the > > > > >>>>> old > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> plugin.xml, > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> then reinstall using the new one (and update the > cached > > > > >>>>>>>>> plugin.xml). > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> b. If they are identical, copy all the native code > > > > >>> files > > > > >>>>> from > > > > >>>>>>>>> the > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> plugin into the project again. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The idea is that you can change your plugin's native > > > > >>> code, > > > > >>>> JS > > > > >>>>>>>>>> modules, > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> or > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> assets, and after a prepare you'll be running the > > latest. > > > > >>>> We > > > > >>>>>>>>> already > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> have > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cordova plugin add foo --link, but it wasn't very > > useful. > > > > >>>>> This > > > > >>>>>>> will > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> make > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> plugin development a much smoother flow, without too > > much > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> implementation > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> effort. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checking for changes to plugin.xml lets us know that > no > > > > >>>> files > > > > >>>>>>> have > > > > >>>>>>>>>> been > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> added or removed, that <config-file> edits haven't > > > > >>> changed, > > > > >>>>> and > > > > >>>>>>> so > > > > >>>>>>>>>> on, > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> meaning that simply copying the native code again will > > be > > > > >>>>>>>>> sufficient. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do people think? Any gotchas that I overlooked? > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Braden > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >
