Hi Sven!

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 2:36 PM Sven Claussner <scl.gp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> One problem of the current registry (before it was broken)
> is that there are compiled plug-ins for just one platform,
> e.g. Win32, if compiled at all.
> Therefore users of other or newer platforms, e.g. OS X,
> either have to compile it on their own or simply can't use it.
> This is an overload to non-developing users.
> I thought it it's a good idea to provide plug-in builds for all
> relevant platform at a single, central address.
> Each asset should have it's own folder there, such as
> $hoster/gimp-registry/plug-ins/$plug-in
> This makes it easy for users as well as the asset browser and
> downloader component in GIMP to browse and find assets.
> I don't want to promise too much, but perhaps it could
> be integrated into our Jenkins CI system one day and then
> it's easier to generate jobs for the plug-in builds, too.

I'm honestly not sure what the best path may be in this instance.
Certainly CI builds for the major platforms would be awesome, though.

> I'm not sure whether it's a good idea to rely on private Git
> hosting provider like Gitlab. If they started going the Sourceforge.net
> way we had to move again. Does the GNOME infrastructure deliver
> something appropriate, too?

This is a fair concern.  I can only say that in this case GitLab itself is
a free software project (
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/LICENSE - MIT
License).  We can host the infrastructure on our own servers if we need
to.  If everyone feels we are better off on GNOME infrastructure, I'm all
ears if we can try to keep a similar level of accessibility for users.
Pat David
gimp-web-list mailing list

Reply via email to