On 13 December 2016 at 09:00, Nyall Dawson <nyall.daw...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 13 December 2016 at 08:48, Nathan Woodrow <madman...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Yeah I do agree with this point. Remove what isn't needed first then make >> the rest always on, or even better just >> remove the whole core plugin concept completely as it doesn't make sense >> IMO. > > I've also been thinking... maybe we should make a QEP about "no more > core plugins, no exceptions!", get it agreed upon and accepted, and > then block any future additions of core plugins.
Ok, done. See https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/issues/85 Nyall > > Nyall > >> >> - Nathan >> >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 8:24 AM, Nyall Dawson <nyall.daw...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 12 December 2016 at 21:14, Nathan Woodrow <madman...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > +++++1 >>> > >>> > Yes please. if it's core (plugin or not) it shouldn't be optional and >>> > should >>> > be enabled always. >>> > It's just confusing for people and honestly doesn't feel right having >>> > core >>> > parts disabled/enabled, imagine if >>> > the style dock or atlas stuff, etc was optional. Messy and confusing. >>> > >>> > The other issue is when some of us don't run with all core plugins >>> > enabled >>> > all the time it's hard to judge the >>> > full state of things as a complete package e.g I see tons of screenshots >>> > with the shortest path >>> > plugin enabled and taking half the dock space when I bet most people >>> > would >>> > never use it. >>> > >>> > So a massive +1 from me on this one. >>> >>> I'm a +1 / -1 on this! >>> >>> To explain: I'm +1 on processing being removed from the list and being >>> made always-on. Processing is an integral part of QGIS now and I see >>> no reason why anyone should want to run QGIS without processing. >>> >>> I'm a strong -1 on making all core plugins enabled and mandatory. My >>> reasoning here is that the current batch of core plugins is a random >>> mix of stuff of varying value and usefulness. Historically a lot of >>> them are just there because they were introduced before the current >>> python/plugin infrastructure was in place and no one has removed them >>> yet. I see absolutely no value in making plugins like "oracle raster", >>> "evis", or "gps tools" manadatory, and lots of reasons why they should >>> not be (ui clutter, no-one maintaining these plugins or addressing >>> bugs in them). Even a useful plugin like "coordinate capture" adds a >>> lot of UI clutter and should not be mandatory. >>> >>> There's also the issue that we have core plugins with overlapping >>> functionality (geometry checker vs topology checker). >>> >>> I think in future we could re-asses this, but right now we need to >>> first focus on cleaning up, consolidating and purging the existing >>> plugins (see https://github.com/qgis/qgis3.0_api/issues/67). Then we >>> should evaluate whether the remaining core plugins should be ported to >>> python and moved from the core repo to instead exist as separate >>> standard plugins. >>> >>> Nyall >>> >>> >>> > >>> > - Nathan >>> > >>> > >>> > On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 9:05 PM, Victor Olaya <vola...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hi >>> >> >>> >> This has been discussed in the past, but i think no decision was >>> >> taken, so I want to bring back the discussion. >>> >> >>> >> I think that core plugins should not be visible in the plugin manager, >>> >> and users should not be able to disable them. If they are core, they >>> >> should be active (the menus and buttons can be removed with the >>> >> "View/Customization..." functionality if the user wants to) >>> >> >>> >> Since we removed the ftools plugin and now have the corresponding >>> >> functionality from Processing, some users are confused for not finding >>> >> the usual tools there. We have kept the same menus, for those that are >>> >> used to them and dont want to use the toolbox. However, if users do >>> >> not have Processing enabled, they won't see those menus. And it is not >>> >> obvious that they have to enable Processing to get something that >>> >> previously was a different plugin.. >>> >> >>> >> I think this is an interesting discussion, so if you have ideas or >>> >> think that this might have disadvantages, let's talk about it in here. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Thanks! >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> Qgis-developer mailing list >>> >> Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org >>> >> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >>> >> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > Qgis-developer mailing list >>> > Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org >>> > List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >>> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >> >> _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer