I don't think that these are quite compelling enough arguments for not
developing it here yet. Pulling it in would imply that it is written by
us or we get a code grant at the appropriate time. If it is the former,
would such plugins live in the bloodhound repository? As separate
plugins we would probably have to release it as another signed package
alongside the main bloodhound package...
I don't wish to judge the right approach at the moment but I would not
be averse to such a plugin being written by us at some point if there
are no technical problems and someone eventually wants to.
But let's get on with the more pressing matters!
Cheers,
Gary
On 16/10/12 10:59, Peter Koželj wrote:
+1, it does sound useful but not like something that most users could not
live without. But I might be wrong and if I am, we can always "pull it in"
later. IMO there are more pressing matters to be addressed first.
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Joachim Dreimann <
[email protected]> wrote:
I don't believe we should bundle plugins that aren't activated by default.
If we don't believe it's useful enough to be optional-out or non-optional,
why would we ship it in the first place, never mind why are we even
building it? Trac-Hacks is the right place for those sort of plugins.
- Joe
On 16 October 2012 09:29, Gary Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
It sounds to me like Peter was arguing for opt-in here.. of course it
could still be bundled as a sort of contrib package and either left
uninstalled or installed but deactivated.
In this case, I am not sure what I would advise. I expect we will need a
solution for other non-core plugins at some point anyway.
Cheers,
Gary
On 16/10/12 09:08, Joe Dreimann wrote:
I can agree with it being a separate plugin from our current ones.
We should bundle it with Bloodhound as an opt-out in my opinion.
Joe
________________________
@jdreimann - Twitter
Sent from my phone
On 16 Oct 2012, at 07:38, Peter Koželj <[email protected]> wrote:
Agree. Definitely sounds as a true (from user's perspective) plugin and
not
something that would necessary be a core Bloodhound feature
(bundled non-optional plugins).
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 5:21 AM, Apache Bloodhound <
bloodhound-dev@incubator.**apache.org<
[email protected]>>
wrote:
#231: Batch create tickets from wiki lists
--------------------------+---**-----------------
Reporter: jdreimann | Owner: nobody
Type: enhancement | Status: new
Priority: major | Milestone:
Component: ui design | Version:
Resolution: | Keywords:
--------------------------+---**-----------------
Comment (by olemis):
The first thing I can say so far is that it belongs neither in theme
plugin nor in dashboard plugin nor in mutli-product plugin . This
ticket
is about a whole new different subject and IMO these features should
be
implemented in a separate plugin either if considered to be supported
by
us in the end or not .
Besides , clicking on create tickets should create a new version of
the
web page , and editing conflicts need to be taken into consideration ,
as
with regular wiki page edits .
About scope , well , maybe this proves to be useful beyond wiki pages
themselves and can be implemented in other views supporting
WikiFormatting
(e.g. tickets ) . This aspect matters from an implementation
perspective
that's why I ask
''';)'''
--
Ticket URL: <
https://issues.apache.org/**bloodhound/ticket/231#comment:
**2 <https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/ticket/231#comment:2>>
Apache Bloodhound <https://issues.apache.org/**bloodhound/<
https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/>
The Apache Bloodhound (incubating) issue tracker
