On Jun 3, 2004, at 9:13 PM, Reini Urban wrote:
> Malcolm Ross Kinsella Ryan schrieb:
>> Should we perhaps separate the development of plugins from the main
>> wiki
>> engine in CVS?
>
> Why?
>
Other projects have done it, which isn't exactly a recommendation, but
just an acknowledgement of the thinking.
The core phpwiki is *capable* of running plugins, and indeed needs to
have a couple of nice examples to encourage people to get writing them.
But is a plugin author necessarily "good enough" to be a phpwiki
contributor? Not necessarily ... so perhaps they should have a
different CVS tree?
Also, some of the more interesting plugins (like VisualWiki) have
external dependancies on things like graphviz software, that the core
phpwiki does not rely on at all.
If the plugins and wiki are packaged together, the packager either has
to include (a reference to) all the external dependancies of the
plugins (even if the end user never uses them), or has to allow
"possibly-broken" plugins to be installed.
So we immediately have a good argument to separate out at least the
external-dependancy plugins.
I think it's reasonable to consider separating out all the plugins -
they are not core functionality of phpwiki, they are not needed in
order for it to work fully, they are optional code.
You could still release a phpwiki+plugins package, as well as a
phpwiki-without-plugins package. More choice for the system
administrator.
-jim
|
