On Sunday 05,September,2010 12:48 AM, Evgeni Golov wrote: > On 09/02/2010 03:35 PM, Julien Cristau wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 12:37:23 +0200, Evgeni Golov wrote: >> >>> RT, is this ok for you? Even if it has to go through new? >>> >> Sorry for the delay. Are we missing out on a lot if we only ship the >> existing plugins, and not the new ones? If not then I think that would >> be best for now. > > We miss the codenav, extrasel, insertnum, prettyprinter and treebrowser > plugins then. I do not consider any of these essential for the regular > work with geany, so we could drop them from the release. However I do > not know how users will think when they know upstream released 0.19 with > these, but Debian does not ship them while calling the version also 0.19 > (with my Debian hat off and the user hat on, I'd have a short wtf > moment, looking at the version number and expecting the plugins being > there). > > @hyperair: do you have any strong opinion on this? Julien is right > saying dropping all new plugins is the easiest way to go. I agree with everything mentioned here. The aforementioned plugins are not particularly necessary for normal Geany use, just extra nifty features. I believe The best way to approach this, considering we're frozen, is to leave out the new plugins. -- Kind regards, Chow Loong Jin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature