* Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> [2006-06-13 16:04:52]:
> There are some problems with plugins at the moment... > > Cyberdo has written a plugin API which is partially designed for > security, and therefore wraps many classes, and doesn't give access to > e.g. Node. In future, extensions to this may allow for untrusted or > semi-trusted plugins; a custom Loader might only allow access to > plugin-safe classes for loaded jar files. > > Bombe has written a really simple plugin API which allows you to access > everything, without wrappers. > > Neither of these is documented. > > We need a single, documented plugin API. > > What is the next step? I can certainly see an argument for plugins only > to be able to access plugin-safe or specific classes, although actual > untrusted plugins support is probably some way off... And it is clear > that there should be a set of interfaces and/or classes which are > available to plugin devs, and are clearly documented, rather than them > having to understand all the complexities of the node... So generally I > side with cyberdo's approach... So do I. However we need to decide how and where we implement an http-redirect hook in cyberdo's API. NextGen$ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20060613/8a7bdd47/attachment.pgp>
