Ross Gardler wrote: > Just to be clear. The reason we decided (in the past) not to allow > plugins to have dependencies in this way is because it requires the user > to have a deep understanding of what plugins work with what other > plugins. Even worse, they need to know which versions of plugins will > play happily.
> By requiring the user to know this we will end up with user support > questions, which in turn will result in us having to maintain > documentation, which in turn will get out of synch with the reality of > development, which will result in more user confusion. > So, my proposal is to document what plays with what in a feature > definition file as described in the previous email. We can generate > documentation from this file and it removes the need for the user to > worry about version numbers of plugins. This was really helpful because if made me go back and re-read you previous posting and really understand features. +1 for the concept How about naming them in a way that explains better what they are. Something like compound-plugin for example? -- Ferdinand Soethe
