Hi, Now that I have finished "AsPlugin" (I think "Export as Plugin" would have been a better name), I would like to set up some kind of "PlugOut" system.
https://github.com/chris2fr/tiddlywiki-as-plugin PlugOut would be a repository, even on a local filesystem, that would act as a library for Plugins. I could export the current wiki as a plugin and load it into the PlugOut library. Thus all the other wikis could update themselves from the PlugOut library. Pretty nifty, huh? Christopher P.S. If I wanted to have my plugin created dynamically in the current wiki, I would have to have one tiddler change the contents of another tiddler because plugin tiddlers are not calculated. C: On Sunday, November 8, 2015 at 10:12:02 AM UTC+1, Christopher Mann wrote: > > Hi again, > > Would you please be able to give me feedback on this approach? > > https://github.com/chris2fr/tiddlywiki-as-plugin > > It is about using the plugin mechanism to try to satisfy George Geek and > perhaps Tobias Beer. It works as an export filter. > > Thanks, > > Christopher > > On Saturday, November 7, 2015 at 11:18:33 PM UTC+1, Tobias Beer wrote: >> >> Hi Jeremy, >> >>> Currently, we are limited in leveraging this by a sophisticated >>> plugin-mechanism that defies a simple "reuse tidbits" approach and forces a >>> "publish a versioned bundle of codebits and supporting tids for >>> distribution". >>> >>> I’d like to understand the issues you see with the current plugin >>> mechanism. Are you envisaging a specific alternative? >>> >> >> Thanks for asking. Not sure about the specifics, the tenets of >> improvements might be: >> >> 1. easy bundling of tiddlers >> - come to think of it, including plugins >> 2. for reuse in a bundled manner >> - meaning: as shadows (compare: inclusion on TiddlySpace) >> >> The plugin mechanism does cater for (some of?) that scenario, only the >> means to use it for this purpose are possibly limited to selected >> individuals who know the how to's. To me, the goal would be indeed to >> simplify this "packaging" process and thus allow reusing tiddler packages >> in different context, as if plugins (or then actual plugins), and possibly >> even containing not only content but also structure, even functionality... >> in short: whatever ...could be my master template packaging all kinds of >> things, reused throughout my wikis. Could be a "my docs package". Could be >> a "my todo setup" containing the basic scaffolding for my to do list >> workflow... however, on a much more "simply create and use a basic package" >> level rather than a "figure out how to package and manage plugins" level, >> with versioning, naming conventions or whatever may be recommended for >> tried and true plugins, rather than "simple bundles". >> >> There are currently two ways to “reuse tidbits”: a JSON file or a plugin. >>> The JSON file is just about the simplest thing it could be: a nice simple >>> plain text rendering of the source of a group of tiddlers, and is easy to >>> work with in other tools. The plugin mechanism introduces just enough >>> “sophistication” to satisfy their purpose: to be an *updatable* reusable >>> tidbit. >>> >> >> So, yes, the way how plugins work once they exist is great. Just the way >> to create one is not as simple as it could be to allow for a more user >> centric packaging of whatever tidbits into bundles. In fact, I'd even shy >> away from using the name "plugin", as it comes with the connotation of >> being a developed thing, coded of sorts. Psychologically alone, simply >> packing up tiddlers into reusable bundles (being shadows in a target wiki) >> would sound much simpler than being the author of a plugin and all the >> presumed responsibility one might assume comes with such a position. It >> would make packaging a common task and process rather than a by default >> advanced, elevated one. >> >> >>> Is it just that the support for building plugins in the browser is >>> primitive? >>> >> >> I guess so. By default, such a packer would create the most simplistic >> package conceivable, in terms of setup and required data. (Right now I >> don't even know the full requirements for plugins, tbh. (without >> researching) ...and then perhaps an "advanced options" panel that can be >> toggled so as to specify any other (plugin) parameters that may be needed / >> used / specified, perhaps with a help / info bubble that explains what a >> given metadata-field is for. >> >> Pragmatically speaking: possibly a streamlined Tinka that... >> >> - makes tiddler selection as easy as possible >> - currently, selecting tiddlers is by individually ticking off >> checkboxes next to titles matching a manually entered filter >> - only asks to specify the most basic details required for packaging, >> leaving out everything that truly is not >> - in fact, could be just a title and nothing but >> - avails the complete / advanced options in an expandable section >> >> Best wishes, >> >> — tb >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/86d959f2-f943-43ab-8406-acd09e3ffa1f%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
