Am Freitag, den 28.10.2011, 22:41 -0700 schrieb Matthew Brush:
Anyway, just a thought to make things more consistent and less
redundant. It seems like while converting and moving to Git would be
an
ideal time to do this. Feel free to +1, -1, comment or ignore.
+1
:)
--
Dominic Hopf
29.10.2011 09:41, Matthew Brush пишет:
Hi all,
Is anybody opposed to removing the geany and Geany prefix from the
plugins in Geany-Plugins. I mean at least for the directory name in
the source tree, README/Site, and PLUGIN_SET_INFO() name?
It's always bothered me when I go into *Geany's*
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 22:41:07 -0700
Matthew Brush mbr...@codebrainz.ca wrote:
Is anybody opposed to removing the geany and Geany prefix from the
plugins in Geany-Plugins. I mean at least for the directory name in the
source tree, README/Site, and PLUGIN_SET_INFO() name?
-1. When installing
On 29 October 2011 20:44, Dimitar Zhekov dimitar.zhe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 22:41:07 -0700
Matthew Brush mbr...@codebrainz.ca wrote:
Is anybody opposed to removing the geany and Geany prefix from the
plugins in Geany-Plugins. I mean at least for the directory name in the
29.10.2011 14:22, Lex Trotman ?:
you are right that any plugin packaged*separately* should indeed
have geany in the package name but that doesn't affect directory
names or plugin manager names
+1
package names are packaging teams buisness,
as they are already named with geany- prefix
Am 29.10.2011 05:38, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Well done, I tested all but GeanyGDB and found some extra warnings,
see [1] probably as my checking is stricter than yours. -Wall -Wextra
-O2 -no-unused-parameter
Plugin maintainers should look at these since they may indicate real
errors, eg
Am 29.10.2011 05:38, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Starting from a clean machine, I found many dependencies are
undocumented. Many plugins required the dev package as well as the
specified package, ok its sort of obvious, but it would be nice to
mention as well.
Other than the dev packages,
On 29/10/2011 06:41, Matthew Brush wrote:
Hi all,
Is anybody opposed to removing the geany and Geany prefix from the
plugins in Geany-Plugins. I mean at least for the directory name in the
source tree, README/Site, and PLUGIN_SET_INFO() name?
It's always bothered me when I go into *Geany's*
Le 29/10/2011 14:25, Alexander Petukhov a écrit :
29.10.2011 14:22, Lex Trotman пишет:
you are right that any plugin packaged *separately* should indeed
have geany in the package name but that doesn't affect directory
names or plugin manager names
+1
package names are packaging teams
On 30 October 2011 02:07, Frank Lanitz fr...@frank.uvena.de wrote:
Am 29.10.2011 05:38, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Starting from a clean machine, I found many dependencies are
undocumented. Many plugins required the dev package as well as the
specified package, ok its sort of obvious, but it would
On 11-10-29 05:36 PM, Lex Trotman wrote:
On 30 October 2011 02:07, Frank Lanitzfr...@frank.uvena.de wrote:
Am 29.10.2011 05:38, schrieb Lex Trotman:
Starting from a clean machine, I found many dependencies are
undocumented. Many plugins required the dev package as well as the
specified
[..]
They should be documented, IIUC the build script checks, thats why
they fail to build.
Having to search the build script to find dependencies is not good.
The best situation would be to have the ./configure summary print something
like this:
Plugins:
Addons:
12 matches
Mail list logo
