Hi Brian, Le 11 déc. 2011 à 16:27, Brian Aker a écrit : > > On Dec 8, 2011, at 4:37 PM, Daniel Nichter wrote: > >> Hingo said in another thread that DRIZZLE_DECLARE_PLUGIN is newer, but I >> prefer DRIZZLE_PLUGIN because it's shorter and forces all the plugin's >> metadata (authors, version, etc.) into its plugin.ini, and since I don't >> think we can get rid of the plugin.ini, it seems logical to me to centralize >> metadata in it. > > I am fan of it being in the source file. > > My reason is that historically I find that projects churn module/plugin API's > with some frequency. Keeping it in source makes it easy to port to whatever > the current flavor of interface is without much effort.
Is it possible to put everything in the source file? If not and we're stuck with plugin.ini files, then we'll have to port that info in any case (if the plugin API changes), so porting a few extra lines doesn't seem bothersome, especially if all the info to be ported is in one file with a common format. My other reason for preferring the plugin.ini file is that it's slightly easier to parse. -Daniel
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
