2011/3/8 Ben Walton <[email protected]>: > Excerpts from Maciej Bliziński's message of Mon Mar 07 03:22:56 -0500 2011: > > Hi Maciej, > >> It is possible to fit a plugin architecture into the existing code, >> if communication paths are provided. I could imagine a bit of >> Python code which would wrap plugins from a certain directory, and >> took the responsibility of communicating with them. > > Yes, I it could be made to work. That would more tightly couple > checkpkg to GAR though (at least in the sense that checkpkg would > expect to be told where plugins live).
I would need to verify that, but I think that checkpkg can discover where it's being run from, which would allow to locate a plugin subdirectory. > If this were to be > implemented, the packages themselves should carry the plugin code so > that it could be verified outside of the GAR/build context. Does that > make sense to you? (Note that I'm not really pushing for this, just > discussing the idea.) I wouldn't like checkpkg to execute code contained in the package. A broken package with broken code could for example damage the database and the files I own on the buildfarm. I'd be more inclined to provide a way to include data, which could be later used for checking. The checking code would be in the repository / on the filesystem, and would process input data from the package. As far as code goes, I'm for strict control of what is executed. Maciej _______________________________________________ maintainers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers .:: This mailing list's archive is public. ::.
