David Crossley wrote:
Ross Gardler wrote:
David Crossley wrote:
I see that many of our plugins, even new ones, are not using
the naming convention.
... snipped from plugins/pluginInfrastructure.html
-------------
org.apache.forrest.plugin.PLUGINNAME
net.sf.forrestPlugins.PLUGINNAME
In addition the name of the plugin should indicate
the type of plugin it is:
NAME-input
NAME-output
NAME-internal
-------------
Should we amend the existing names before the 0.7 release?
Should we get plugins/build.xml seedPlugin target to
append the -$type part.
I forgot I'd written that ;-)
The practice I have been following is that if it is an input plugin then
it need not have the extension (given that most plugins are input.
However, this is probably not ideal since it is an exception to the rule.
I'd say that, for the 0.7 release we should make all the names conform
to the documented standard and deprecate all the old plugins (this is OK
since the plugin infrastructure is part of the 0.7-dev work).
Why "deprecate"? Rather we should just rename (and mention
the consolidation in changelog).
I just figured that we could just leave the old zip files in place so
that people wouldn't have to update their forrest.properties. However,
now you ask the question I realise it would also mean leaving them in
plugins.xml which will be confusing. Since we are in alpha there is no
need to do this.
+1 to name changes.
Ross
