Ho all, I agree on this interpretation.
All the best. On 08/26/2018 08:49 PM, Martin Isenburg wrote: > Hu, > > Having just added a new plugin [1] today marked "experimental" my > expectation was that I would use this "experimental" flag for my first > one or two or three versions until I am sure it works for others as > well and until all the initial kinks of a first time plugin submission > are ironed out. I had the expectation that it would signal to the > users that this is a new effort and that it may take a few more > updates to find and fix all the bugs. Since doing this initial > experimental release this afternoon, for example, I've created already > a newer version that I was intending to submit soon. > > Hence maybe a two week time limit for plugins to > remain experimental would be a useful way to limit the number > of experimental plugins to those newly submitted or currently under > active development and kick out those that are idle in their > experimental status. > > Regards from Zanzibar, > > Martin > > [1] http://plugins.qgis.org/plugins/LAStools/ > > > > On Sun, Aug 26, 2018, 21:11 Borys Jurgiel <li...@borysjurgiel.pl > <mailto:li...@borysjurgiel.pl>> wrote: > > Hi Lists, > > Before I make a QEP I'd like to know your general thoughts. > > After I removed the deprecated plugins filter from the Plugin > manager (and > make them always visible) [1], Alex suggested doing the same with the > Experimental status. > > Initially it was designed for two cases: to mark a whole plugin as > experimental, and to just mark the recent version (so a kind of > beta). Both > cases seem to be popular among authors: at the moment we have 215 > plugins for > master, from which ~40 are experimental only and ~20 are in both > versions. > > However, I'm not sure if it makes much sense nowadays. Releasing > 'stable' and > 'experimental' versions seems a bit overscaled to me. And there is > a simpler > solution: If the recent version is buggy, users can just download > the last > working one from the repo and install from zip. The former case, > when the > whole plugin is experimental, seems to be often misused: authors > can use it to > hide some specialised of localised plugisn from majority of users. > In fact > even I committed such clear misuse, marking the Plugin Reloader as > experimental just to not clutter the list for normal users... > Another reason > could be a shyness. But again, we have the rating stars now and > don't need to > rely on the author's shyness anymore. > > So... Do you see important reasons to keep this tag? Maybe we should > completely drop it? Or just remove the option to hide them from > manager, > leaving the flask icon on the plugin details page? > > Regards, > Borys > > [1] https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/7713 > > > > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org <mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org> > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > > > > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer -- Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=IT&q=qgis,arcgis
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer