On 18 November 2010 10:43, Thomas Martitz <thomas.mart...@student.htw-berlin.de> wrote: > On 17.11.2010 23:29, Enrico Tröger wrote: >> >> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 19:52:40 +1100, Lex wrote: >> >> Hey, >> >> I don't want to go too deep into this discussion, just my cents: >> >> To keep it shorter, I'm 100% agree with Colomban's statements. >> > > I also 100% agree. Plugin development shouldn't be a PITA.
Yes, so how often do you want to keep having to update your plugin?? I am suggesting an option that allows you to only depend on what you need, you can still depend on the whole interface if you want to. But we, and lots of FOSS programs, seem to assume that "upgrade to the latest" is always an acceptable solution. But if it is, why does Geany still retain compatibility with GTK2.8? That is what we call having your cake and eating it too. > > The current capabilities plus the ability to query the Geany version > (perhaps even svn revision or built date) at runtime are good enough for the > vast majority of problems. But that keeps things in *hard* lockstep, if I go on holidays and miss updating my plugin it doesn't work with the latest Geany. Cheers Lex > > Best regards. > _______________________________________________ > Geany-devel mailing list > Geany-devel@uvena.de > http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel > _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
