> I very much agree with what you said above, I think that having a > modular system should enable us to provide a good range of optional > functionality out of the box, like numerous other successful projects > do. In my opinion, this will have many positive effects, like favor a > closer collaboration between plugin writers and core developers, ensure > a better homogeneity for a given release and also make way for a simpler > and more modular installation.
I agree on all accounts. Another point I would like to make is that there is so much uncertainty surrounding plugins that I believe many (and especially companies) are hesitant to install them. They are hosted on a separate site and many seem to be unmaintained (when the person writing it loses interest - then what). I believe many select a competing system because they need to install plugins to get the functionality they need. I also propose that "official" plugins are called modules to emphasize the difference between them. > Now some brainstorming about the simpler installation part :-) I like all of your ideas, only two comments: 1) The user should be able to select between: - Standard (set of most common modules) - Full (all modules) - Custom (which would run through the menu you described) 2) All modules should be possible to be managed from the admin interface. - Endre --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" 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/trac-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
