On 01/12/2012 01:44 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
[...]
There was no change in documented functions, signals or behaviour AFAIK.
Ok, if the functionality used is not *documented* to be in the API
then it is not protected, but, as the change in behaviour is going to
require a change in the plugin interface an API bump will happen by
default.
No, it won't(didn't) require any changes to the API I don't think. It
was never documented that you should rely on the Project dialog being
destroyed and cleaning up your notebook page for you.
Would you, for example, increment the API and ABI if GeanyPluginX depended
on the fact that the main GtkVBox widget in the Glade file was named `vbox1`
and we changed it to `vbox_main`?
If it was in the interface documentation, yes, else no.
In this case GProject was (understandably) relying on undefined internal
behaviour of Geany rather than using the signal provided in the API to allow
a plugin to remove the notebook page from the projects dialog (not that the
docs would lead you to believe this, in fact the opposite).
Not sure why it needs to depend on internal behaviour, but I havn't
studied the details of what it does.
This may a side effect of the ad-hoc inclusion of features in the
plugin interface, they are only added when asked for.
Since the project dialog may now be created (and only once) before the
plugin is conected to the signal, the plugin interface will need to be
changed to still allow current operation to continue since AFAICT the
only documented way the plugin can get the notebook is the project
create signal. I guess you and Jiri should work out the details of
what is needed.
Nope, plugins can add their notebook page during the
`project_dialog_create` signal and remove it during the
`project_dialog_confirmed` signal, nothing changed here I don't think.
Since we're loading plugins into the Geany process with basically complete
access to everything, then we should bump the API version on every commit,
since we could potentially be changing undocumented internal behaviour that
the plugins can have access to if they really want.
Because C is a crappy language we can't get the compiler to hide stuff
it knows about from plugins. That is why the insistence is on only
using *documented* API which we will protect by changing API/ABI. If
something is visible due to the limitations of C, but not documented,
no API/ABI bump is needed.
In any case, the docs, especially for `project_dialog_confirmed` should be
improved/fixed.
Probably, but what?
Namely removing this from the `project_dialog_confirmed` docs:
"Warning:
The dialog will still be running afterwards if the user chose
'Apply'. "
AFAIK there's no Apply button for project dialog and in fact it seems
like the ideal place for plugins to remove their notebook page from (I'd
need to test to be 100% sure).
Cheers,
Matthew Brush
_______________________________________________
Geany-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
