Re: [Opensg-core] Plugins and Directory Structure

[Dirk R. <di...@in...>]

	Hi Gerrit,

On Sat, 2006-08-26 at 11:18 +0800, Gerrit Voss wrote:

> > If we do something that involves changing basic things (like the FC
> > naming scheme), I would like to get it decided before 2.0 beta.
> 
> my notion would be more extending than changing, having an optional
> libname: in front of the fieldcontainer name should not screw up any
> existing code.

Hm. Yes, I guess that would work, too. It would mean that an app can
either bind explicitly and just expect the FC type to be loaded already
(and use just the name), or they can provide the libname and the system
will load the lib if it's not loaded already. I would still
enforce/assume unique names across libs (no foo:bar and baz:bar) to keep
things simple.

> could we leave it as /usr/lib/OpenSG/plugins or even
> better /usr/lib/OpenSG/2.0/plugins. AFAIK this is more like the standard
> naming scheme used and allows different versions to coexist.

Works for me.

> I'm a little bit undecided whether to use something we must search for
> in every fieldcontainer name or if we should use something like
> @libname:class, which is a little bit less readable than the pure :
> version  but still can be seen as having a meaning like 
> 'at libname find class' ;-) And we can decide on fcName[0] what
> to do.

I don't mind that very much, but I don't think it would be a big
problem. Looking for a character in a string that is processed and
compared anyway shouldn't be a big deal.

	Dirk