I would be fine with either approach, one plugin or two. If the only different is the URL, one plugin seems preferable IMHO.
- Dave On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Matthew Montgomery <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mar 23, 2010, at 10:34 AM, Anil Gangolli wrote: > >> >> Might be easier to factor a base class out, extend and keep them separate >> plugins. > > I considered that as well but the only real difference in the two is the > endpoint URL and that seemed liked overkill for something that would be easy > to do with a config property. So essentially I'd like to make the existing > plugin a bit more configurable. > >> On 3/23/2010 8:13 AM, Matthew Montgomery wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> I've created a comment validator plugin for the TypePad AntiSpam service. >>> This service is free for personal and commercial use and actually uses the >>> Akismet API. This being the case, I can pretty easily merge the new service >>> into the existing Akismet plugin. It would default to the Akismet service >>> but allow selection of TypePad AntiSpam as well. Submitting a patch for the >>> completely separate plugin is perfectly fine as well but seems somewhat >>> undesirable due to the duplication. Assuming there is interest in this, >>> what opinions are there around the preferred approach? > > -- > Matthew Montgomery > Product Development IT > Oracle Corporation > > > > > > >
