Hi Jeremy,
> OK, so what’s wrong with using a field like “plugin-type” to indicate that
> the special behaviour of unpacking shadow tiddlers should take place?
Nothing at all. Not sure, perhaps I made such a suggestion by mistake /
omission. I think by now we have established that the kind of bundles I
described are (/ or at least can be) indeed plugins, of a new type.
What do you mean by “special treatment”? Plugins (where `plugin-type` is
> “plugin”) have no special behaviour in the wiki store beyond the unpacking
> of shadow tiddlers. Features like the plugin listing in the control panel
> aren’t intrinsic to the plugin mechanism; they’re just tiddlers in the
> control panel.
What special treatment do you think plugins are subject to that you’d like
> to avoid?
Most prominently, version handling, especially upon import. Other than that
(possible / optional) expectations / conventions for the control-panel to
show details, etc..
Now that you’re bring even more of the behaviour of plugins to your
> “bundles” I’m really failing to see the difference between a bundle and a
> plugin. Surely you are just re-inventing plugins?
These are the things I'd want from a "*bundle*":
1. no versioning requirements
- so, no version check on import
- this is the most important simplification over current plugins
2. be able to bundle any tiddlers, including other plugins
- this does not seem to be possible at the moment
- a shadow-plugin won't create any shadows it contains recursively
3. no deletion of constituent plugin-tiddler when performing
*repackPlugin*
- the source wiki should stay functional as is
I would not call that reinventing, but rather conventions for a new
plugin-type that both has simplification (versioning) and additional
capabilities (plugin-bundling).
But you are saying that the plugin mechanism isn’t suitable for the purpose
> you have in mind, and yet as a replacement you are suggesting adding all
> the features of plugins to JSON tiddlers.
I hope it is clear now that the above mentioned requirements are not met,
as of today. At least, there appears to be no existing plugin-type workflow
available to cater for either.
A plugin is a JSON tiddler with the additional field “plugin-type"
> appropriate content and the shadows packed into the body. How much simpler
> could it be?
>
> But that is exactly what plugins are for! Again and again you are saying
> that something else is needed and yet you are just describing the existing
> behaviour of plugins.
Currently, we cannot create the kind of *bundle* (as a *plugin*) with the
requirements listed above, can we?
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/1a6e26f6-0f2a-41de-be30-a364bdfb0de7%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
