+1 I assume (without really knowing it) that there is an easy "upgrade" path for extensions currently not being an oxt to become one. We need to document (if not already done) this "upgrade" in a way, that motivates the extension developers to do it.
rgds Jan I. On 6 February 2013 17:04, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > currently we can deploy many extension snippets, for example we can > deploy single xcu files, single jars, etc. All the single deploy units > that typically are packaged today in an oxt file with some further meta > data. > > On the way to a cleaner and less complex extension deployment process I > propose to *deprecate* everything that is no oxt package with AOO 4.0. > That means that everything will still work but we will potentially > change it in the future. > > In consequence of this users have to package every single deploy unit in > an oxt. Ideally with a description and all the nice possible meta > information that makes a good packaged oxt much more user friendly. > > > Any opinions? > > Juergen >
