On Wed Apr 9 08:40 PM, Brian LeRoux wrote: > > The cons are wrong. You can import plugins and indeed you can test plugins. > The statement that we shouldn't need to compile/transpile is not correct if we > want to evolve things. Its the only path we have that will keep things > backwards > compatible. (That we could determine.)
I put up an example here: https://github.com/gdesolutions/ja-lib/tree/master/tests/plugins/file.encrypt The cons were against the current plugin.xml & <clobbers/>, <merges/> To be clear, it's a pro for using something like browserify. If part of the net benefit is we can have a story like: cordova create plugin file.encrypt https://github.com/gdesolutions/ja-lib/tree/master/tests/plugins/file.encrypt/package.json Extend existing plugin: https://github.com/gdesolutions/ja-lib/tree/master/tests/plugins/file.encrypt/LocalFileSystem-es6.js cordova plugin test <--- this (runs in some bleeding edge browser) That's a big win / net benefit for being more opiniated about the module format. The browserify node.js story looks like: https://github.com/gdesolutions/ja-lib/tree/master/tests/plugins/file.encrypt/LocalFileSystem.js But trying to bring the entire node.js api *into* the browser is a big hack, turning an apple into an orange.
