Does ist really reduce the risk of bad maintained plugins? I don't think so. When merging plugins then the risk is higher that none of the features will get maintained any longer. But when the features are implemented in own plugins, then maybe some of the plugins aren't maintained, but some others are.
Åsmund Østvold wrote > I like the destination of the plugin but.... > As the number of jobs grow the number of plugins grow. Many plugins are > not maintained for a long period. Keeping similar features in one plugin > reduce the risk of this happening. This increase the ease of use and > administration of a Jenkins installation. > > IMHO +1 for integration -- View this message in context: http://jenkins-ci.361315.n4.nabble.com/Request-hosting-a-plugin-tp4761476p4761925.html Sent from the Jenkins dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/1437717839669-4761925.post%40n4.nabble.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
