[Geany-devel] Restructuring the Geany-plugins project?

Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger at xxxxx
Fri Jun 5 15:03:00 UTC 2009

On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 23:24:28 +0200, Frank wrote:


>On Wed, 3 Jun 2009 20:02:07 +0200
>Enrico Tröger <enrico.troeger at uvena.de> wrote:
>> We once said, plugins should be and keep independent so they can
>> installed on their own and without the need to install all other
>> plugins. Therefore, currently each plugin (those in the geany-plugins
>> project) have an own build system, based on autotools. Additionally
>> we have a common build system, based on waf, which one can use to
>> build all plugins at once from SVN.
>I'd like to keep this way. Reasons for:
>A plugin like geanyLaTeX is only needed by a very low number of people
>(unfortunately) around on the one hand, on the other hand its using
>some memory and needs to be distributed with other maybe needed

Only if users activate the plugin, I think the disk space it needs when
only being installed can be ignored.

>plugins. A plugin like geanyLua is depending on Lua, which is quiet
>popular but not as popular as everybody got Lua installed or is using
>it at all. These are only two plugins which might cause trouble since

Same as above. If users don't have installed Lua, the Lua plugin can't
be loaded at all, so there is no problem.

>Just to show what I mean: I've got all plugins installed from geany
>main distribution as well as from the geany-plugins project - 18 if wc
>is counting correct - which takes about 2MB only for the *.so files on

Well, if you strip your binaries, you will notice it only takes about
600K. So again, this isn't really a matter.

>As a conclusion I pretty much vote for:
> [...]
>- Improving the build system for a geany-plugins release to support a
>regular snapshot release as well as supporting the merging of po files.

IMO regular snapshot releases are independent of the build system as
such, it's more a matter of the timing and from where to take the code
for a release (trunk, branches, tags, whatever).

As the others said, in theory we could do both: a  common
infrastructure of plugins whose authors wish it (that is, *one* build
system, *one* translation system) and keep the other plugins separated.
So, for now this would result in a common plugin package including
spellcheck, addons (mine), shiftcolumn (Andrew) and geanydoc, externdbg
Then geanylatex, geanylipsum, geanysendmail (Frank) would keep
separated and so won't benefit from the changes at all.

(not sure about the other plugins)

Thinking about this makes me even more puzzled as this would make
things even more complicated for packagers and especially for users.
Then they can install some plugins bundled together (spellcheck,
addons, shiftcolumn, ...) and they must install others explicitly
(geanylatex, geanysendmail, geanylipsum). Not to mention the hazzle for
package maintainers.

So, I think if ever we need to find a solution for all or at least most
plugins not only for some. And since Frank won't agree on the proposal
of a common plugin project, I guess we will keep the current way with
all its limitations as already pointed out and need to find workarounds
or whatever for the translation issues and stuff.


Get my GPG key from http://www.uvena.de/pub.asc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.geany.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20090605/f21dd8d8/attachment.pgp>

More information about the Devel mailing list