[Geany-Devel] Removing of orphaned plugins

[Lex Trotman]

On 7 April 2013 07:36, Thomas Martitz
<thomas.martitz at student.htw-berlin.de>wrote:

> Am 06.04.2013 22:35, schrieb Lex Trotman:
>
>
>>
>>
>> On 7 April 2013 06:19, Matthew Brush <mbrush at codebrainz.ca <mailto:
>> mbrush at codebrainz.ca>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 13-04-06 09:26 AM, Frank Lanitz wrote:
>>
>>         Hi folks,
>>
>>         Unfortunately we still have a number of orphaned plugins. To
>>         get this
>>         thing cleaned up I've created a branch at
>>
>>         https://github.com/frlan/**geany-plugins/commits/**
>> Removing_orphaned_plugins<https://github.com/frlan/geany-plugins/commits/Removing_orphaned_plugins>
>>
>>         to remove orphaned plugins. I'm going to apply this patchset
>>         to master
>>         if there will nobody adopt the plugin.
>>
>>
>>     Hi,
>>
>>     I have to agree with Thomas, it seems silly to remove fully
>>     functional plugins that users (probably) like and use just because
>>     the status of the author/maintainer is unknown.
>>
>>     IMO, it'd make more sense to only remove them if they have some
>>     critical unfixed bug that no on will step up to fix, or if they
>>     become obsoleted by other plugins (like GeanyGDB).
>>
>>     My $0.02
>>
>>     Cheers,
>>     Matthew Brush
>>
>>
>>
>> Well, I can understand both points of view.  Yes users may be ahppy with
>> plugins as they are.
>>
>> That is, *if* they work ok, thats fine, but plugins can affect the whole
>> of Geany, unless they are checked reasonably often with the Git Geany by
>> "someone" then we don't know even if they compile, if they segfault or have
>> a bazillion bugs.  Finding all this out at the last minute before a release
>> puts too much stress on the release team and results in poorer releases
>> overall.
>>
>>
> I think they do work. I can tell for sure for treeviewer, and recent
> threads on the ML have shown that geanylua also still works just fine. For
> the others, they clearly still at least comile.
>
> Let me ask the other way around. Are there known bugs caused by the
> plugins in question, i.e. a bug report against one of those plugins or
> Geany where the root cause is one of those plugins? I'm not aware of any,
> so it should be assumed that they work since there was no radical change in
> neither the plugins nor the plugin API.
>

Well, Frank has committed the contributed GTK3 patches, but the contributor
noted that they were not heavily tested, and you even pointed out a
possible typo.  It really should not be down to Frank to test these things,
there are too many plugins.  That is why they should have maintainers.

There is also a Geanylua usage question on the ML that AFAIK is unanswered,
so there can't be anyone willing to contribute to it.  Again its isn't
Franks job to know Lua and answer such queries.  Maintainer isn't just
code, its also supporting users with use of the plugin.  When a user can't
get help that is a poor quality product that reflects on all the other
plugins and Geany too.




>
> As for poorer releases, I find a release that removes functionality (i.e.
> one or more fine working plugin) for no reason much poorer.
>

Agree, its our respective definitions of "no reason" that is different. :)

And if you find that the functionality of one of the listed plugins is
useful, and you are using it, then you are testing it, so maybe you can
step in as maintainer, I know you are capable enough :)

Cheers
Lex



>
> Best regards.
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.geany.org
> https://lists.geany.org/cgi-**bin/mailman/listinfo/devel<https://lists.geany.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.geany.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130407/21a558d0/attachment-0001.html>