Is it possible to do both? I mean path/configuration and if the path/configuration is not found a prompt.
Giorgio On 1/29/13 6:13 PM, "Michael Brooks" <mich...@michaelbrooks.ca> wrote: >About a year and a half ago, I started to refactor the BlackBerry bin/ >(ANT) script. My goal was the following: > >1. Use SDK path if explicitly stated in the config file >(project.properties) >2. Otherwise search the PATH and use the SDK found >3. Otherwise fail noisily > >Back during our client work days, our apps were often built for a specific >SDK (4.6, 5.0, or 6.0). The config file was an explicit way of telling >collaborators that the target SDK. However, as WebWorks and the Playbook >SDK emerged, explicitly stating the SDK became less a repetitive hassle. >This is why the PATH option would have been nice. In general, I think >every >platform should strive to support PATHs. If you find that users need to >switch between multiple SDKs, then consider allowing the user to >explicitly >override the default SDK PATH. > >As for the prompting discussion: I don't mind prompting, but it MUST be >overridable for automation purposes. You should be able to provide an >option that overrides that particular prompt (`--bbwp`, >`--signing-password`, `--device-ip`, etc). > >Michael > >On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: > >> Totally agree Jesse. My first pass at BB support includes interactive >> prompting. I would love to get rid of it, or provide another way to >> specify that stuff. Like you say, perhaps command line options is the >>way >> to go (if someone wants to automate the use of the script, for example). >> >> The easy fix is to spew out a big warning after you add BlackBerry to >>your >> project's platforms instructing the user to customize <path to bb config >> file>. People who use Cordova BlackBerry already (like Don) do something >> like this as it is. >> >> On 1/28/13 3:53 PM, "Jesse" <purplecabb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >Fil, It will most likely not just be BB, so your solution may not be >> >future >> >proof. >> >I would draw a line in the sand stating that there must be a bb-config >> >file >> >which instructs the cli build command of which sdk version to use (via >>an >> >explicit path ). OR it could be a command line argument at build time. >> >I assume that we should be able to target any specific sdk version, and >> >this is not restricted to being a once only issue that can be resolved >>at >> >the time of 'adding a new platform target' and must be dealt with every >> >time we build. >> > >> >I think making this script interactive is extremely limiting if we >>want it >> >to be used by other tools. If this is not an issue, then go for it ... >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: >> > >> >> So that's what I'm trying to see if we can fix. >> >> >> >> The multiple SDKs that use the same executable script name throws a >> >>wrench >> >> into this whole thing.. Lame. >> >> >> >> What if we drew a line in the sand and said for BlackBerry we only >> >>support >> >> BB10? Then we can get rid of prompts and tell people to put their >>BB10 >> >>SDK >> >> (not their playbook SDK) bbwp path on their system PATH? >> >> >> >> On 1/28/13 3:37 PM, "Brian LeRoux" <b...@brian.io> wrote: >> >> >> >> >uh oh. so, does this mean we do both and put prompting behind a >> >> >configuration option? >> >> > >> >> >RECURSIVE ERROR >> >> > >> >> >On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Gord Tanner <gtan...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> I think the reason blackberry doesn't put the sdk on the path is >> >> >>because they need to have multiple sdk versions (all with the same >> >> >>command names) on the same machine. >> >> >> >> >> >> -1 for path >> >> >> +1 for prompting >> >> >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> >> >> >> On 2013-01-28, at 6:22 PM, Jesse MacFadyen >><purplecabb...@gmail.com> >> >> >>wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> +1 path and configuration for credentials. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> -1 prompting for values, or confirming previous values. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I think the tool should be non-interactive, or at least that is >>my >> >> >>>expectation. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On fail simply provide advice on how to remedy the situation. >> >> >>> Prompting for a path is out of scope IMO. Its much better to >> >>document >> >> >>> expectations and fail noisily when they are not met. I thinks. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Cheers, >> >> >>> Jesse >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Sent from my iPhone5 >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On 2013-01-28, at 2:23 PM, Don Coleman <don.cole...@gmail.com> >> >>wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I have the Android tools in my path but not BlackBerry. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Prompting for the BlackBerry file locations and passwords etc >>works >> >> >>>OK. It >> >> >>> would be nice to search the default location, or at least store >>all >> >> >>>this >> >> >>> info in ~/.cordova-cli so the next time I run the tool I can just >> >> >>>confirm >> >> >>> the previous entries. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I like the way the yeoman.io audit script ( >> >> >>> https://github.com/yeoman/yeoman/wiki/Manual-Install) checks for >> >> what's >> >> >>> required and offers solutions for what's missing. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>>> Hey all, >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Working out some bootstrap-type stuff for cordova-cli. Here's a >> >> >>>>situation >> >> >>>> I am dealing with now in the cli code that I would like people's >> >> >>>>input. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> When you add Android to your project's platforms, the >> >>requirements, as >> >> >>>> imposed by the underlying cordova-android library, is that the >> >> >>>>Android SDK >> >> >>>> be installed (duh) and that the SDK tools are available on your >> >>path. >> >> >>>> When you add BlackBerry to your project's platforms, you also >>need >> >>the >> >> >>>> BlackBerry WebWorks SDK. However, because BlackBerry uses a >> >> >>>>configuration >> >> >>>> approach, you do not need to have the WEbWorks SDK on your path. >> >> >>>>Instead, >> >> >>>> you need to explicitly list out the location of the SDK in a >>config >> >> >>>>file >> >> >>>> (as well as device and signing key passwords, device and >>simulator >> >> >>>>Ips, >> >> >>>> and whatever else is necessary). >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> As such, the CLI tools work similarly: you need Android tools on >> >>your >> >> >>>>path >> >> >>>> to work with Android, and for BlackBerry you are asked a few >> >> >>>>questions in >> >> >>>> a prompt when you add a blackberry project the first time (enter >> >>the >> >> >>>>path >> >> >>>> to your SDK, enter your signing key password, etc). >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> So could easily go with this. It works as is. The question that >> >>comes >> >> >>>>to >> >> >>>> my mind though is, why is there a difference? I think we should >> >>pick >> >> >>>>one >> >> >>>> of these approaches and stick with it: either have the SDK's >> >>required >> >> >>>> tools on the system's PATH, or ask the user for them every time >>(or >> >> >>>>point >> >> >>>> them to the config file for filling out). >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Thoughts? >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> >-- >> >@purplecabbage >> >risingj.com >> >>
