On 24/11/27 12:54 PM, Matthias Bläsing wrote:
Am Mittwoch, dem 27.11.2024 um 12:42 -0800 schrieb Ernie Rael:
In this case, "new NetBeans version", what purpose is served by requiring
authors ... "Request validation"
* Are there many cases where a plugin should/would not be wanted in
the new release?
* Somewhat macabre, what if the author dies?
Why not the supported owner's action is "don't validate" rather than the
other way around.
Because "Request validation" is an action the author can decide to do
or not do. "don't validate" is not.
They are both actions that can or not be done. I don't get the
"invisible side effect" thing.
It would be an invisible side
effect of creating a new NB version in the portal.
If the author can't be bother to test the plugin,
I wouldn't be surprised if it's common to just click the button without
testing.
it is not fit to be
shipped.
? I could see "appropriate", but seems a broad definition of "fit".
Although I could see how one might assume that click implies support. Or
something.
And if you want it regardless, you can use the catalog für the
previous NB version.
So the user pays if the author's attention is elsewhere.
Is it still an open question of what is the community process that
results in something being taken out of the catalogue? I haven't seen
any discussion on that. Depending on the author to say it works, and not
the people that use it, seems wrong.
If the goal is to optimize workflow... Seems more like there's an
assumption that the click signs a contract that declares the plugin is fit.
-ernie
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
