On Tuesday, 4 July 2017 at 04:49:29 UTC, Manu wrote:
I've been using code-d for a while, and it generally works
well. I've also noticed there's another plugin available, which
at the time I first looked, appeared to be older and
less-featured than code-d.
I've recently had a couple of colleagues ask me which plugin to
install, and I noticed that both seem to be up-to-date these
days, and this leads to confusion.
Looking at the feature list, it appears that both plugins do
mostly the
same stuff.
My feeling is, having 2 very similar plugins is confusing to
potential
users, and it undermines user confidence. Ie, users have the
feeling that
they're competing hacky things maintained by some guy, rather
than
something that's more 'official' with consolidated community
support. I
also tend to presume in these situations that the 'proper' one
is the one
with the most users/installs, but that's not clear either in
this case.
I know this has nothing to do with the truth, but it's about
perception and
first impressions. Little things matter.
If authors of both plugins are active here, I ask; why have 2
separate
plugins?
I can't imagine any reason for divergence. I would be a lot more
comfortable if there was only one with multiple contributors.
Projects with
many contributors always inspire a lot more confidence than
multiple
overlapping projects with one contributor each...
So, is there a reason not to merge the projects beyond ego?
It's just different users developing different solutions. I
disagree with the notion that having multiple competing, up to
date implementations would "undermine user confidence" in D.
Quite the opposite, I'd think.