Maybe the it would be better to write warnings into the log first. Even the news app uses some internal functions (e.g. translation is not a public interface), so we'd need to increase the public API further.
On 08/26/2013 11:06 AM, Christian Reiner wrote: > Moin all, > >>>>> On Sunday 25 August 2013 20:40 Frank Karlitschek wrote: >>>>> Let me know if you have any questions. >>>> On Sunday 25 August 2013 21:17:35 Thomas Tanghus wrote: >>>> - There were plans of not allowing apps to call functions in the OC (or >>>> OC_*) namespace. Are those postponed? If not how will it be implemented? >>> On 25.08.2013, at 21:36, Christian Reiner <f...@christian-reiner.info>: >>> Hmmm, just out of interest, since I never heard of this before... >>> >>> I do understand the idea behind this. But such step would mean to crash >>> more or less every non-core app, since the public API simply does not >>> provide all required functions. >>> If such step is planned, wouldn't it make sense to inform app developers >>> beforehand instead of waiting till the release say to be surprised by all >>> apps being broken? >>> The real solution would be to implement all required functions in the >>> public API, but that has to be done first. It has not been done yet. So >>> there currently is no way for app developers to "fix" their apps, except >>> they themselves "fix" the core. Which does not really make sense in my >>> eyes, because it shifts core development to the third party app >>> developers. >> On Monday 26 August 2013 09:46:23 Frank Karlitschek wrote: >> You are right. Sorry, I thought I mentioned this plan before. >> >> I think everyone will help to port the 3rdparty apps in time. I think Bart >> did some work already. The plan is to have the public api in place in the >> next few days which means that we still have some time for porting. But >> even if one app is not full ported for the feature freeze than it can and >> should still be released together with ownCloud 6 via the app store or even >> a bit afterwards. >> >> I hope that makes sense. > Well, as mentioned the intention behind the change certainly makes sense. > But still I ask myself now: > * are the external developers going to be addressed directly? > * why is it expected that someone digs through all the apps out there trying > to "fix" them? I mean great that someone invests into this, but wouldn't it > be > much easier to inform the external developers beforehand and have them "fix" > their apps? With "to inform" I mean an active contact, like an email, not "to > mention it somewhere". > * Why aren't such changes communicated? In the end this is a break in the > framework. Isn't that worth getting spread? > > Please don't get these open words wrong. > But sometimes I just shake my head about how little effort exists in this > project to inform people outside the inner core team. > Why? > > Christian Reiner (arkascha) > _______________________________________________ > Owncloud mailing list > Owncloud@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/owncloud _______________________________________________ Owncloud mailing list Owncloud@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/owncloud
