← Back to team overview

drizzle-discuss team mailing list archive

Re: Is Drizzle a developers-only project?

 

Stewart Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 04:46:22PM -0800, Monty Taylor wrote:
>> We currently have out of tree plugins building. It works. It's in the
>> tree. Done. Yippee.
> 
> indeed, Yipee.
> 
>> Now- if what you are saying is that we should not move ALL of the
>> plugins _OUT_ of the tree, then I agree with that. If it's a plugin and
>> it's in the tree, it should stay in the tree. However, there is no valid
>> technical reason any more that a person has to actually have the full
>> drizzle source code to just compile a plugin- or that a developer needs
>> to put their plugin into the trunk for it to be managable to deal
>> with.
> 
> I think out of tree plugin is a step on the road to being in the tree
> - just like most modules are going into Linux Kernel. You run
> out-of-tree modules when you absolutely have to, but if you want
> quality, you generally don't go near them. Being accepted into
> mainline is suitable penguin pee blessing of some level of code quality.

Ok. Yes, in general I agree with this... as long as we don't use it as
an excuse to ignore our headers.

>>> We do not have any stable APIs... we have less batshit insane APIs,
>>> but they're not stable.
>>>
>>> As a developer, the question of "where is this used" and "how is this
>>> used" should not have to be solved by downloading 1,000 sep tarballs,
>>> extracting them and then trying to work out how the heck to compile
>>> 1,000 different pieces of software, 500 of which will have borked up
>>> autotools and 300 of which won't build on your dev box.
>> This is a straw man. The only thing you need to download to work on your
>> plugin are drizzle and your plugin. That's two. They're both run by the
>> exact same build system, and it isn't borked, because I've already fixed
>> it. Show me an actual example in our system of where this is a problem
>> and I'll fix it. :)
> 
> Not our system, some other developer is going to screw it up. We are,
> of course, perfect :)
> 

Ah - you haven't seen how the plugin build system works yet.

I _really_ need to write that blog post...

Monty



References