Regarding save - I think automatic save could be an issue for folks who want to "try out" experimental platforms, or pick up platforms from git URIs or master branches. What would happen in that case? May be that's is why npm --save exists in the first place.
Where to save - For making progress, looks like we will also have to finalize if it will be persisted in config.xml or in package.json. Most IDEs will not use the --save option, but may choose to directly persist in the required file when a platform is added using a GUI. Regarding restore - automatic restore makes a lot of sense. Does mefire's PR not cover that ? From: Chuck Lantz<mailto:cla...@microsoft.com> Sent: ?Friday?, ?January? ?9?, ?2015 ?12?:?43? ?PM To: dev@cordova.apache.org<mailto:dev@cordova.apache.org> Cc: Michael Brooks<mailto:mbro...@adobe.com> +1 on automating. That's why Mefire's PR for platform add just uses the version information in config.xml if it is present. I think the idea behind "--save" was to make this npm-like so that if a value is already in config.xml, then you can also update it by specifying a different version and "saving" it. (Similar to how "npm install cordova@4.1.2 --save" would update package.json in the directory you're executing the command even if an earlier version was present). He mentioned the two PRs on the "--save" for platform earlier in the this thread. As an improvement it could just "save" by default if there is nothing present in config.xml. Personally I'd always use "--save". I also agree what we do for platforms we should likely do for plugins too. Now, we had originally said in a hangout that "config.xml" should contain "app stuff" and that platform and plugin versions and preferences/params qualified as app stuff. We could certainly go towards package.json (or something package.json-like) since that's really what we're trying to emulate here at the end of the day I think. However, I also thought we said that config.xml was too engrained to move away from it (though clearly the web as a whole is moving towards the W3C app manifest). If we don't use config.xml, it definitely needs to be a document at the root level not under ".cordova" since you should clearly check it into source control and it shouldn't be hidden. It's details about the app not how the CLI should behave. -Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Josh Soref [mailto:jso...@blackberry.com] Sent: Friday, January 9, 2015 11:26 AM To: dev@cordova.apache.org Cc: Michael Brooks Subject: Re: platforms/plugins save and restore from config.xml Leo wrote: >I had asked some questions about save and restore a while back >One of my biggest questions was why would these commands be an option? I can't think of any reasons. > What I'm looking for, as soon as possible, is that Cordova 'project' >metadata is stored logically and consistently so that the CLI and >multiple IDEs could simultaneously work on the same project and know >about what each other have done wrt. adding/removing >plugins/platforms/etc. Seems reasonable >Does removing experimental advance that goal or does it, as Michal says, >put obstacles in the path of getting there by requiring long term support >of an incomplete and possibly confusing (more options?) solution? I think Michal is right. It probably makes more sense to integrate the code behind save/restore into (platform|plugin) add and (something) so that it automatically just works. I'm not sure offhand what 'restore' would look like in a such a model though... Also worth considering is the recent request for `cordova run not-installed-platform` `cordova run not-installed-platform` (CB-8283) should honor the values from `cordova platform save` That might be the replacement for 'restore', although it probably isn't ideal...
