Addi wrote:
Diwaker Gupta wrote:
The naming convention for the plugins is fine, but I think it would be
nice if users are able to declare required plugins using simpler names
like "pdf", "text", "docbook" and so on.
We can figure out what simple names exactly to use later. I just
wanted to see what people feel about this? It should be trivial to
implement (though I have _no_ clue how! :-D), and I think it'll make
config much less intimidating (even I get scared typing
org.apache.forrest.input.viewHelper.xhtml.ls)
Diwaker
Yup, I have to say I agree. It is also a pain when going to the plugin
dir in linux to manually install the plugin because I like to use tab to
finish out long filenames but I pretty much have to type the whole thing
in since they all start with the same long name before getting to the
actual useful part of the name.
How do you avoid name conflicts given that Forrest does not have a
monopoly on plugin publication?
That is what if I call a plugin foo and Joe calls his plugin foo and
then Forrest creates one called foo?
Ross
