Since no one has complained about this, I take it as acceptance that  
we should move things over. Does everyone on t.e.o have a trac-hacks  
account so we can setup the permissions correctly?

--Noah

On Dec 11, 2009, at 10:31 AM, Noah Kantrowitz wrote:

> Does anyone have a good reason to not transfer development of these  
> plugins
> to trac-hacks? That seems far more consistent and I see no reason  
> not to
> other than historical stuffs.
>
> --Noah
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
>> Behalf Of Christian Boos
>> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2009 1:44 AM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [Trac-dev] [RFC] /plugins toplevel on t.e.o
>>
>> Remy Blank wrote:
>>> Christian Boos wrote:
>>>
>>>> /plugins
>>>>  /0.10
>>>>    /WebAdmin
>>>>   /0.11
>>>>    /mercurial-plugin
>>>>    /spam-filter
>>>>  /0.12
>>>>    /spam-filter
>>>>  /multirepos
>>>>    /mercurial-plugin
>>>>
>>>
>>> (snip)
>>>
>>>
>>>>  0.X/trac/*
>>>>  0.X/trac/<module>/*
>>>>  0.X/tracopt/<module>/*
>>>>  ...
>>>>  /plugins/0.X/<plugin>/tracext/*
>>>>  0.X/sample-plugins/<single-file-plugin>.py
>>>>  ...
>>>>  3rd party plugins
>>>>
>>>
>>> I assume you chose the {version}/{name} scheme instead of
>>> {name}/{version} as on trac-hacks for symmetry with the rest of the
>> Trac
>>> repository? That may make it a bit more difficult to find the latest
>>> version of a plugin, in the case where e.g. there's no 0.12 version
>> for
>>> a plugin, and the 0.11 version can be used. But I think I like your
>>> scheme better, too.
>>>
>>
>> The big advantage is that this makes it more natural to phase out
>> plugins that were integrated in the core. Otherwise we would carry a
>> /plugins/webadmin forever, and with the above scheme it gets hidden  
>> in
>> the /plugins/0.10 folder where nobody will look at ;-)
>>
>> The disadvantage is as you said, but I guess people will quickly  
>> get to
>> look into the folder for the version they are using.
>>
>> For plugins that are actually unchanged between different versions,  
>> we
>> could just have a copy and use merge tracking.
>> This is to be preferred to "linking", as: 1/ we don't support linking
>> (#2566), 2/ we should better change the plugin version anyway (e.g.
>> 0.11.0.2 vs 0.12.0.2).
>>
>> For "branches", we should put only the plugin(s) relevant to that
>> branch, the others can be taken from the version on which the  
>> branch is
>> based upon.
>>
>> -- Christian
>>
>> --
>>
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Trac Development" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to trac-
>> [email protected].
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en.
>>
>
>
> --
>
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google  
> Groups "Trac Development" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> [email protected] 
> .
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en 
> .
>
>

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac 
Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en.


Reply via email to