Doesn't matter if it works (which it seems to) it not a beauty contest or a school homework assignment ;-). It can be beautified later if needed (but much like the build commands implementation probably never will).

But this is an API thing so it shouldn't be to terrible. I think the worst thing is the symbol tree API which should really be changed. I'll see what I can do about it when I have time.

On a more general note though I think there should really be some agreement among Geany developers regarding how such an API should look like. I don't want to introduce something that's not acceptable for others.

This makes the plugin need to be distributed as two plugins (except on gentoo and others where it is compiled against the end users Geany) one against unmodified Geany and one against modified Geany. So the plugins will have to decide at runtime which is to be enabled and shown to the user. But the user will have to download both.

Not really, the modified Geany simply wouldn't be distributed until the stuff is merged to Geany.

—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.