Is this manual method really any better than the online Phonegap method? Reading around some other threads, it didn't necessarily seem to be the case. I exported to Phonegap and used the online service and the performance wasn't nearly as good compared to CocoonJS. I have no doubt that results may vary from game to game.
Maybe my poor performance was due to using text boxes in my Phonegap export, when I understand that's a big no no for performance... though, it didn't affect my CocoonJS performance. Spritefont plugin doesn't work for Cocoon currently, but maybe it would for Phonegap? I'll have to experiment with it more later I guess.
Phonegap has very poor performance. It becomes just a little better using the manual method and some tweaks like disabling some unused features, setting renderpriority to high and using an external audio player instead the C2 audio object.
I still use it simply (for testing purposes and waiting for something better) because it's the only wrapper that really works with 100% compatibility. No matter if you are using custom objects or behaviors, with phonegap what you see on desktop chrome is what you get also on android but with a barely acceptable framerate.
CocoonJS in its current status is unstable, eats a lot of RAM on the phone, lacks a lot of C2 advanced features and even some basic like accelerometer.
I know that Ludei is working hard on it but now it's not ready for production, hopefully it will be in the near future.
On the other side, I'll never release an app packed with Phonegap. Performance is ridicolous compared to native.
It may sound demotivating but my guess is that we'll never see complex HTML5 apps working at a decent speed on the current Android phone generation.