[Geany-Devel] RFC: Proxy plugins

Matthew Brush mbrush at xxxxx
Wed May 21 14:51:53 UTC 2014

On 14-05-21 06:45 AM, Colomban Wendling wrote:
> Le 19/05/2014 14:17, Thomas Martitz a écrit :
>> [...]
>> Sorry if I sound negative towards libpeas. I'm not fundamentally against
>> it. I try to objectively evaluate it, and it doesn't appear to be the
>> holy grail either, especially with our strong focus on maintaining the
>> plugin ABI/API and exposing the current API via bindings.
> Amen to that.  I'm not saying using Peas is not a good idea, I'm just
> saying we should step a little back and see things in perspective, and
> for what they really are.  If then Peas still seems to be the most
> sensible, then great.

What makes you think (some of us) haven't done that? It's not my fault 
people had fantasies about all the wonderment it could provide and are 
let down to find out that it only saves us rolling one large piece of 
the non-C language plugin puzzle :)

But I agree, it would be fantastic if everyone was on the same page with 
regards to what libpeas provides and how much of it we'll have to 
re-write ourselves into the existing loader if we don't use it, and what 
the dependencies Geany would have afterwards, and how we'd have to 
manually write language bridges to those hook into those languages (ex. 
geanypy), etc.

Matthew Brush

More information about the Devel mailing list