Item209: All Plugins must have their info table updated

As part of preparation of 1.0.0 all plugins on SVN must have their form updated so that

• t.o links are changed to the new website. Please do not do that until the official new name is decided and domain name known.
• Change history must be appended with version names increased by one. This also means increasing the version number in .pm file. The text should be something like "This extended was upgraded to be compatible with XXXXXX" where XXXXXX is our new name.

-- KennethLavrsen - 17 Nov 2008 - 07:31

OlivierRaginel thinks about extending the form with (some of) the data from the table above. This should be decided first to touch all files only once.

-- OliverKrueger - 29 Nov 2008

I did the thinking. And I touched all default plugins and the plugins I have been converting.

The rest must be part of the rebranding

The principle I followed was making the table with this sequence.

• Author
• Copyright (can be merged with the author field. Then I did not split them)
• License (normally GPL)
• Plugin Version
• Change History
• Dependencies (can be more than one field)
• Plugin Home: - http://foswiki.org/Extensions/Item209
• Feedback - http://foswiki.org/Extensions/Item209Dev

Notes:

I removed the benchmark that we all agree sucked. And I removed the Appraisal which was never used. I kept the Dev link and added it again if removed. It is the plan that eventually the Dev topic contains a submit and search to Tasks web and Support web (two applications). Some author (incl myself) also like to have the Dev field available for patches and general discussion. And we need to carry over the old Dev topic content. They contain GOLD for many extensions.

Closing

-- KennethLavrsen - 16 Dec 2008

Then your thinking is very different from mine.

Our idea was that the Dev topic is GOLD, but shouldn't be there. It doesn't belong in the extension, it's just user-contributed comments. Sometimes very useful ones.

Our idea (with OliverKrueger and CrawfordCurrie, iirc), was to:

1. extend the form to better suit our needs
2. extract all that could be extracted from this table, and put them in the form, so one could easily incorporate these things in searches
3. re-think the Dev, Appraisal, etc... topics

We should have more communicated on this, and I must admit it's mainly my fault, as OliverKrueger thought I was leading it, and I kind of gave up as I couldn't find any way that suits me.

Anyway, from what I can see:

1. hasn't been updated (or I cannot see it)
2. is still the same. It's no big deal, as we can anyway move this content later on, IF all extensions are published using BuildContrib
3. you've even rolled-back some plugins where it was knowingly removed.

As OliverKruger stated, the idea was to move (not get rid of) the Dev topic where it belongs: in the Development web, and to create a unique entry point, with links (or tabs) to the dev and support topic. Check Item293 for demo and details.

So for me, what you did is great as we needed something usable before the release, but this task shouldn't be closed, as it's not done yet. Therefor, I'm re-opening it and assigning it to me, but lowering its priority to normal.

-- OlivierRaginel - 17 Dec 2008

Why should the plugin Dev topic be moved to the Development web?? Why is this better than the Extensions web? At least I can find content with a search in Extensions web.

Are you going to fix all the links in 500 extension topics the next days?

There are so many plans and they get implemented half way so nothing hangs together anymore.

I spent half the night trying to get just the default and my own extensions uniform in their info tables. You are going to do the other 400? We are not even allowed to touch 80 of them.

My keeping the Dev topic in Extensions we maintain compatibility and it does not matter at all where the Dev topic is located. It is a self contained world related to one single plugin.

What is important is that we get a generic interface to Support and Tasks so people stop reporting bugs and ask questions on the Dev topic and leave it as a Dev talk topic for patches and feature discussions.

• KennethLavrsen - 17 Dec 2008

To developers. Please stop reverting my changes. I am trying to get a consistant looking 1.0.0 out and this requires that the doc changes and linking I do is maintained.

• KennethLavrsen - 17 Dec 2008