On Thursday 06 October 2005 10:03, Daniel Kristjansson wrote: > On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 13:35 -0400, Isaac Richards wrote: > > > > As for incorporating the plug-ins... I'd rather see a plugin API > > > 2.0 > > > with calls added to make plug-ins embeddable, focus switchable, > > > etc. > > I just would like to see the user interfaces for the various plugins > > more > > integrated, really. Whether that's through absorbing the plugins or > > another > > method, I don't really know yet. =) > Perhaps we should look at the plug-in API of something like Mozilla? > I know it isn't perfect, but they do seem to have some well integrated > plugins.
Heh. When I wrote the original plugin API (thought it can barely be called such), I didn't (and still don't) know anything about any other plugin systems at the source-code level; it was really just a little experiment I did that worked & I decided to submit the patch. My ego was sufficiently massaged when it was adopted for the add-on modules, and it was subsequently enhanced a little bit, but frankly I'm surprised it's survived this long without someone ripping it out and putting in a "real" plugin API, with a bit more bi-directional communication. The current implementation is only the barest level above "fork(); exec()" :=) -JAC _______________________________________________ mythtv-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
