I am all in for "blowing out the dust". TW core development should be agile enough to move on, especially with fundamental, high priority issues like that of tiddler IDs.
If there are plugins that were published for TW 2.1.x and are expected to flawlessly cooperate with 2.6+, I think one should either expect there to be a maintainer or wait for someone to walk in his or her footsteps. There should not be prolonged inaction for fear of breaking existing (legacy) implementations ...blocking TW core progress. There are still two problems with my last version of tbGTD and the current version of the TW core, but it's up to me to take the time required to fix those. I simply can't and wont upgrade or blame the core for breaking my implementation. If there are barriers for an upgrade, then it is the responsibility of the one upgrading an implementation to thoroughly check for any problems. Backwards compatibility should in my opinion not be a given or even have topmost priority. I don't think it's a healthy approach to generally suggest to users that upgrading the core of any wiki is a minor issue et voila, no matter how complex your implementation and depending on (community) plugins, things should work. They just might not and one should not expect that. As Chris pointed out, it's more a matter of giving appropriate notice and expecting maintainers to consider any changes to the core with respect to their plugins ...well, before publishing updates. I do agree with Eric to advocate investigation as to implications of core changes, providing said "tech notes" or migration paths, etc. However, in my opinion, it is not and should not be a given that a plugin designed for core 2.5.x is working with a 2.6.x core or that a plugin that does work with 2.6.x works also does so for a 2.5.x versions of the core. Consider the Mozilla development process... with a new Firefox release all Addons are marked as not working for that release unless tested and confirmed by the addons maintainer, at least so it seems. As I have pointed out in another post [1], I really hope that one day a MUCH more powerful plugin mgt. system will be available to the TW community... one which, for example, allowed to filter (plugin) versions with respect to a given version of TW, a status which must be rechecked for every (major) plugin and core release. At least I do find the TiddlyWiki landscape to be way too complex to do without the support of at least one integrated repository for all kinds of related material. And no, I don't just mean some place onto which to dump some code or documents in an unstructured, all organic fashion. Accessiblity and the ability to evaluate suitability, efficiency and potential risks for adapting a solution (e.g. a plugin) to a given implementation should be top priority. Cheers, Tobias. [1] http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev/browse_frm/thread/1ba8b3361612b527 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev?hl=en.
