till wrote: > > On Saturday, April 20, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Thomas Bruederli wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 2:17 AM, till <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 at 1:35 AM, rodrigo wrote: >>> >>> Is there any particular reason the default set of included (but not >>> activated) plugins has not been separated out from the main repository >>> into repositories of their own? I would even argue that skins, aside >>> from the default, should be separate repositories. My group manages our >>> installation with git and it would make my life a ton easier if this >>> were the case. >>> >>> I don't remember when they were put back into the "master". They used to be >>> more separate. >> >> Wrong. Plugins developed and maintained by the Roundcube developers >> always have been part of the master git repository together with the >> code code. The planned composer-based plugin repository is meant for >> 3rd party plugins. The main goal of that repository is to allow plugin >> developers to publish their modules on a centralized platform and >> allow Roundcube sysadmins to pull them into their local installations. >> That isn't necessary for core plugins because they're already part of >> the distribution package. > The plugins were in their own tree in SVN. Maybe that's what I meant.
Yes, they were back in the SVN times. But even there, it was one repository holding all plugins not individual repositories for each plugin. But I don't say that moving the core plugins to composer is a bad idea. So far my intention of the plugin repository didn't consider that step but it might. ~Thomas _______________________________________________ Roundcube Development discussion mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roundcube.net/mailman/listinfo/dev
