On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 6:34 AM Simon Lees <sfl...@suse.de> wrote: > > My opinion on this is anyone who has a module that is of acceptable > standard both not full of bugs / causing e to crash, and is coded > soundly (Meets coding standards / same kind of code review for any part > of the e code base). Should be able to submit there module into e, > whether that module is enabled by default is another question but having > installed but not loaded modules hardly adds bloat. Modules are also > significantly easier to maintain when in tree. This combined with the > perception from the e17 days that in tree modules were supported > upstream while out of tree modules were not makes it clear to me that we > should generally try to allow them. >
I agree with this Simon. Also am hoping that Mike could introduce some of the features into an in-tree version of desksanity. I'm certain it meets every expected standard, and I've been testing very thoroughly. This module has improved my own productivity using E for development greatly. I wrote the original e-mail because of the fact that it raises productivity within E and I'm very sure for most people it will improve the user experience and most probably (I do believe) encourage developers of EFL to actually use E as their development environment, which is something I know many have pushed for a long time. In summary this is a great addition to the user experience and I think it would encourage developers to be using E for development. It should be (in some form) within the main tree. _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
