On 2010-01-25, at 20:30 , Nick Peelman wrote:
> 
> Show me one application, built upon this model you're touting, that
> has a developer following and a user base.  An app where major
> components of functionality are derived from plugins, with the app
> itself acting as a traffic cop and glue to tie everything together.
> 
> To head off one obvious example: Textmate doesn't count.  Bundles !=
> Plugins, at least not on the scale with which people are talking here.
> Building actions in various scripting and programming languages to
> manipulate text is one thing (albeit an awesome one, I use TM every
> day).  Building this FrankenMail application you're trying to assemble
> is another.


I do believe TextMate is a good example, yes. 

And what makes you say Bundles ≠ Plugins? We're throwing 'plugins' around as a 
rather generic word, and Gruber has explicitly stated he likes TextMate bundles 
model.

Another example of with a clear separation is git. They call it core and 
porcelain, but it's the same idea.

I believe the part that worries you the most is the GUI, and I'm with you 
there. Plugins that try to mess around with the GUI suck. I think we'll have to 
define specific points where plugins can easily manifest in the GUI, to prevent 
a big pile of willy-nilly ad hoc crashing dung from ensuing.

_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
List help: http://lists.ranchero.com/listinfo.cgi/email-init-ranchero.com

Reply via email to