On 2012/7/15 19:56, Lex Trotman wrote:
On 15 July 2012 21:03, Hong Xu <d...@hong.me> wrote:
On 07/15/2012 07:01 PM, Hong Xu wrote:
On 07/15/2012 03:40 PM, Frank Lanitz wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 09:27:46 +0800
Hong Xu <d...@hong.me> wrote:
And, BTW, why geany-plugins project doesn't use a submodule for each
plugin? Not all people need to clone the whole repository, and as it
is separated to submodules, the permission control can be better for
developers.
IIRc this was under discussion in past but was dismissed due to adding
complexity and little overall understanding of this. However, I don't
think cloning the repository is this much traffic. Also a goal was to
have plugins and its patches being reviewed before entering master to
enforce a minimum on quality. This also includes some
fire-and-forget-plugins of some developers as you can see from
MAINTAINERS files there are a lot of plugins out of maintenance.
Thanks. However, I have to make a pull request for any trivial changes
in this way. Do you think this is unnecessary?
In you mind, is there any advantages for geany plugins in this repo
other than other places?
Sorry, any *other* besides the quality enforcement?
Well, of course the geany-plugins is packaged for at least some
distros, in particular debian and ubuntu. That will of course get
greater exposure, and maybe contributions, and also maybe bug reports
:)
BTW you mentioned a third party library, but you didn't say what
library. It would of course have to have a suitable license to allow
it to be included.
The library is here: https://github.com/editorconfig/editorconfig-core
It is released under Simplified BSD License. So I believe this is not an
issue.
Hong
_______________________________________________
Geany-devel mailing list
Geany-devel@uvena.de
https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
