HI, On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Nathan Woodrow <[email protected]> wrote:
> -1 for forcing people to use a single system. I am happy to make a source > repo mandatory, anyone who touches code should know to do that anyway > however I don't want to force people into a system they don't want/like. I > prefer github to our own hub so I would not upload a plugin if forced to > change. > Concur on this viewpoint. On a similar note, I find the most annoying part of plugins to be the lack of coherent descriptions and missing changelogs. I really *want* to know what a plugin actually does, and what's changed, before I upgrade it. IMO such user-oriented documentation should be an ongoing requirement. Many users are not necessarily going to go to the developer's web site to figure out what the plugin does; though, that's often what you have to do now, sometimes to no avail. I still have no idea what many plugins are for, where they show up in the GUI (if at all) or how to use them once installed. Regards, Larry > On 14/02/2014 9:53 am, "Paolo Cavallini" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Il 13/02/2014 22:33, Richard Duivenvoorde ha scritto: >> >> > So not forcing to some kind of system. Just enforcing at least a public >> > code repository + email. And preferably a issuetracker and a webpage. >> > >> > Agreed? >> >> IMHO opinion one repo and one bugtracker are necessary. >> any reasonable system will do. >> All the best. >> >> -- >> Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu >> QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html >> _______________________________________________ >> Qgis-developer mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >> > > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-developer mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
