On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 02:05:46PM +0100, Michael Rueger wrote:
m Hi all,
>
> What I would like to propose is that we organize all plugins in Pharo in
> to a Plugin category.
> So we would then have "Plugin-Curl", "Plugin-Locale" etc. Or
> alternatively "Plugin-Network-Curl", "Plugin-System-Locale" etc.
>
> That would also allow to simply load all plugins into a VMMaker image by
> using a package "Plugin".
>
> What do you guys think?
+1 on a common naming convention for this.
I would also like to suggest something to distinguish VM plugins
from other kinds of "plugins". The reason is that the word "Plugin"
is used to describe the web browser plugin, and maybe other things
in the future. If we say "VmPlugin" or "VMConstruction-Plugin-*
then the difference is clear.
I checked an older Squeak image to remind myself of the original
naming convention, which was:
VMConstruction-Interpreter
VMConstruction-Translation
VMConstruction-Plugins
VMConstruction-B3DSimulation
VMConstruction-TestPlugins
VMConstruction-Applescript
Some older plugins that are maintained outside of the VMMaker
package already use this package naming convention, hence:
VMConstruction-Plugins-OSProcessPlugin
VMConstruction-Plugins-XDisplayControlPlugin
VMConstruction-Plugins-AioPlugin
This still looks perfectly good to me, so how about just using
"VMConstruction-Plugins-*" rather than "Plugins-*"?
Michael Rueger proposed Plugin-* and Tests-*, so guess that
this would be:
VMConstruction-Plugins
VMConstruction-Tests
or is it "Tests-VMConstruction-Plugins" ?? I am not sure.
(cc to vm-dev list)
Dave
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
