Am 16.11.2011 22:50, schrieb Lex Trotman: [..] > I don't think your perception is wrong, but I think that keeping > plugins reasonably separate is also a good idea. As a user I can > choose the parts I want without the parts I don't need. So only > really tiny things should be combined like addons.
We talked about this earlier on IRC and the goal of geany-plugins to have one single plugin bucket where plugins are not splitted up. Right now its already possible to build single plugins e.g. by using --enable flag on waf. > In other cases, like project management, there is sufficient variation > in use-cases that there may be more than one plugin, like how the > current project plugins address two slightly differernt uses. Or in > some cases there is a natural progression from an old plugin to a new > (and hopefully better) one, eg debugger plugins > > What it needs is a technical solution to allow plugins to build on > other plugins. That way the original functionality doesn't need to be > re-built, but it introduces dependencies between plugins. Dependencies? I agree. I think introducing changes to core about GObject etc will make such things easier. Currently its far away. >> Regarding the ideas with separate repos/submodules: This basically breaks >> what the initial idea of geany-plugins was. To share infrastructure, build >> system and translations. The "combined release" idea came actually some time >> after that. >> > > I'm not sure that it prevents any of this, but as I now understand it, > GP plugins can't be built separately so, yes, it makes less sense to > have separate repos. I agree ;) Cheers, Frank
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
