So far, I haven\'t been able to find a \"plain English\" explanation of the difference between Apache Cordova and PhoneGap, and when to use either of them.
I\'m look
Currently, the only difference is in the name of the download package and will remain so for some time.
PhoneGap is a distribution of Apache Cordova. You can think of Apache Cordova as the engine that powers PhoneGap, similar to how WebKit is the engine that powers Chrome or Safari.
Source: http://www.meetup.com/The-London-Dreamweaver-Meetup-Group/pages/Difference_between_Apachie_Cordova_and_Phone_Gap/
Moreover, PhoneGap meets all of the requirements you've specified.
History
Differences
Apache Cordova is the core open source project where development and contributions happen.
Adobe PhoneGap is a distribution of Apache Cordova that additionally provides integration with Adobe’s utilities and services, e.g. PhoneGap Build.
Both Cordova and PhoneGap are extremely similar and their names are often used interchangeably. Apache Cordova receives updates slightly quicker, has a slightly simpler interface and lacks out-of-the-box integration with Adobe services.
Which one to use?
Are you going to use Adobe’s services? Pick Adobe’s PhoneGap. If not, Apache Cordova could be a better fit for you.
PhoneGap was originally an open source project by Nitobi for packaging HTML5 code within native 'wrappers' for the creation of mobile applications. Adobe acquired Nitobi and the PhoneGap technology. Adobe proceeded to contribute the PhoneGap code to the Apache Software Foundation in order to ensure that it remains open source. At this point the name was changed to Cordova, with Adobe maintaining the PhoneGap name and brand.
Adobe plans to add value to Cordova under the PhoneGap name, such as adding tool support and services such as PhoneGap Build.
Currently many people still use the PhoneGap name to describe the open source framework (possibly because it is a better name!), but over time, this will probably change as Adobe builds on the PhoneGap brand and product range.
From a developer perspective, this is a pretty good situation, the framework remains open source, but if you want added value, you pay Adobe.