Hmm. Thats interested. On the one hand, I'de say we could just break those rare plugins into pieces, core.console-common, core.console, core.console-ios. Such that each depend on common, but console installs without ios by default.
On the other hand, I do think its interesting to support disabling a plugin for a given platform, in case it is buggy/unneeded/whatever. Feature for the future. -Michal On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 8:27 AM, Andrew Grieve <agri...@chromium.org> wrote: > Out of core. > > On a related note - Console for iOS brings up an interesting use-case. iOS > now has a working Console for 6+, so it's reasonable for people to want a > console only for other platforms. > > cordova plugin add org.apache.cordova.core.console --skip-platform=ios > > Feature for the future? > > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > So what's the decision here? Out of core right? (Since it hasn't been put > > back in, for iOS) So I can remove CDVLogger from config.xml in the > > template... > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:40 PM, David Pfahler <da...@excellenteasy.com > > >wrote: > > > > > I'd remove it from the core but have the resulting plugin installed by > > > default. This way you have best of both worlds, the pragmatist's > default > > > and the purist's minimalism. > > > — > > > Sent from mobile > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > +1 to making it a platform dependency and keeping it as a plugin. > > > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > > > >> I love that idea. Makes transitioning easy. > > > >> On Jul 2, 2013 1:38 PM, "Michal Mocny" <mmo...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > perhaps platforms should support plugin dependencies? > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Andrew Grieve < > agri...@chromium.org > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Tyler - remote web inspector works for iOS 6 on device, not just > > in > > > the > > > >> > > simulator. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I removed the logger since it got moved to the > > > cordova-plugin-console > > > >> > repo. > > > >> > > To be clear, is the proposal here to delete that repo? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > I'd like to see it remain *not* in core only because it can be > > > written > > > >> > as a > > > >> > > plugin. Let's just have it installed by default by CLI? > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Tyler Wilson < > > > >> twil...@pulse-robotics.com > > > >> > > >wrote: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Another view: what percentage of developers use the > console.log > > > API > > > >> > > during > > > >> > > > development? I would think that the vast majority do. So why > > add a > > > >> step > > > >> > > for > > > >> > > > a feature that most developers use or need? My Cordova work > has > > > been > > > >> > > mostly > > > >> > > > done on-device, since I am using a custom plug-in that > requires > > > the > > > >> > > > hardware. So until there is a way to debug the JS on-device, I > > am > > > >> > highly > > > >> > > > dependent on the console.log functionality. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > So basically +1 keep in core for me. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Thank you, > > > >> > > > Tyler > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > On Jul 2, 2013, at 3:22 PM, Brian LeRoux <b...@brian.io> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > Its a good point about ios6+. I can't imagine anyone is > > > developing > > > >> > for > > > >> > > > > anything less (other than corodva@<=2.9 legacy support). > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Michal Mocny < > > > mmo...@chromium.org > > > >> > > > > >> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> To answer the question of why we may want to leave it out: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> - If you are using remote debugging on ios6+ you don't need > > it > > > >> > > > >> - Our log wrapper has been repeatedly less functional than > > the > > > >> > system > > > >> > > > >> implementation (though we do fix these issues as they are > > > found) > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> But that does not mean I am arguing against leaving it in > by > > > >> > default. > > > >> > > > >> Idealist me says 3.0.0 should move everything that can be a > > > plugin > > > >> > out > > > >> > > > to > > > >> > > > >> a plugin. Pragmatist me says this is pretty safe/useful in > > > core. > > > >> > +0 > > > >> > > > vote > > > >> > > > >> here either way. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Perhaps we could have a set of "default" plugins that are > > > >> installed, > > > >> > > but > > > >> > > > >> can be un-installed? This would give us best of both > worlds. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -Michal > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Filip Maj <f...@adobe.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>> The only one I can think of is a production environment to > > > try to > > > >> > > save > > > >> > > > on > > > >> > > > >>> a few kb of footprint and a few initialization cycles. I > > don't > > > >> > think > > > >> > > > it's > > > >> > > > >>> worth removing entirely from core, though. Instead, try to > > > make > > > >> the > > > >> > > > >>> built-in Logger plugin as easily removable as possible. > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >>> On 7/2/13 9:57 AM, "Marcel Kinard" <cmarc...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >>>> Are there a scenarios where it would be good to not have > > > Logger > > > >> in > > > >> > > an > > > >> > > > >>>> app, such as permissions, footprint, or just not needing > > any > > > >> > logging > > > >> > > > >>>> functionality? I'm having a tough time thinking of any, > so > > > I'd > > > >> > also > > > >> > > > say: > > > >> > > > >>>> +1 leaving Logger in core > > > >> > > > >>>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >
