I added some validation for plugin names (to follow reverse-domain-name convention) a couple of weeks ago but there needs to be more of it for sure.
On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have created an issue to track the meta tag addition. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-5128 > > I agree with doing validation with plugman during publish time. We should > decide soon which ones are going to be mandatory and which ones will be > optional. Probably update the plugin spec + our docs around creating > plugins as well. > > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Perhaps either plugman or the registry should do some validation, and have >> some "required" fields? I know that PhoneGap Build when you try to submit a >> plugin they error out if you are missing some fields that they require. >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Gorkem Ercan <gorkem.er...@gmail.com >> >wrote: >> >> > +1 for adding metadata but should more of the metadata be compulsory? >> > >> > JBoss tools plugin discovery uses the cordova.io registry and some of >> the >> > plugins are missing a lot to. http://snag.gy/aAxjL.jpg is a screenshot >> > that shows how the case. http://snag.gy/J8rl6.jpg is a screenshot of a >> few >> > plugins that has most of its data. As you can see with the missing >> > descriptions etc. it is not possible to do an informed decision on >> whether >> > to use a plugin or not. Although information such as keywords does not >> seem >> > like important it becomes quite useful when you are trying to find a >> > certain plugin. >> > -- >> > Gorkem >> > >> > >> > On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Michal Mocny <mmo...@chromium.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > > +1 to repo / issue / website / docs etc metadata >> > > >> > > -1 *for now* to dependencies at specific versions, and testing related >> > > changes like <mode>, just because its not clear what the right solution >> > to >> > > these problems is. We do need to address it, but those topics will >> > likely >> > > move to separate discussions. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Lucas Holmquist <lholm...@redhat.com >> > > >wrote: >> > > >> > > > i was just thinking the same thing :) >> > > > On Oct 18, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Carlos Santana <csantan...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > plugin.xml metadata is looking more and more like a package.json >> > (i.e. >> > > > npm) >> > > > > ;-p >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Steve Gill < >> stevengil...@gmail.com >> > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> Yes I meant plugins.xml >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >>> On Oct 18, 2013, at 5:43 AM, Lucas Holmquist < >> lholm...@redhat.com> >> > > > >> wrote: >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > >>>> On Oct 17, 2013, at 7:54 PM, Steven Gill < >> stevengil...@gmail.com> >> > > > >> wrote: >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>> So looks like want to to start including more data on >> > > > >>>> http://plugins.cordova.io. >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>> Repo tag -> points to repo where plugin lives >> > > > >>>> Issue tag -> points to issue tracker (with component for jira) >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>> Testing related (can get discussed more in testing thread >> > > > >>>> Mode tag -> to differentiate between testing mode and normal >> mode >> > > > >>>> JS module tag for test module >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>> Dependency related >> > > > >>>> adding version number to dependency tags so they don't just grab >> > > > latest >> > > > >>>> always. Multiple approaches were discussed and this discussion >> > > should >> > > > >>>> probably happen in a new thread. >> > > > >>>> >> > > > >>>> Thoughts on above? Suggestions for other meta data we should >> look >> > > into >> > > > >>>> adding to config.xml? >> > > > >>> did you mean plugin.xml? >> > > > >>> >> > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > Carlos Santana >> > > > > <csantan...@gmail.com> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >>
