RFE - Maintain a list of 'stable' plugins in the source [packaging]

Bug #531062 reported by BJ Dierkes on 2010-03-03
6
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
Drizzle
Wishlist
Unassigned

Bug Description

Future thinking: It would be a good idea to have a file that lists the plugins that are considered stable/production quality. For packaging this makes it clear that a plugin is more-or-less safe to add to a distribution set.

Suggested:

drizzle-XXXX.XX.XX/plugin/STABLE

A flat file that lists plugin names that are stable. With the number of plugins it will be difficult for a package maintainer to keep up on discussion lists and what not to know where a plugin is in its development cycle.

On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 12:13:31AM -0000, BJ Dierkes wrote:
> Future thinking: It would be a good idea to have a file that lists the
> plugins that are considered stable/production quality. For packaging
> this makes it clear that a plugin is more-or-less safe to add to a
> distribution set.
>
> Suggested:
>
> drizzle-XXXX.XX.XX/plugin/STABLE
>
>
> A flat file that lists plugin names that are stable. With the number of plugins it will be difficult for a package maintainer to keep up on discussion lists and what not to know where a plugin is in its development cycle.

We could also have this in the plugin.ini and have a configure option
or something....

--
Stewart Smith

On 03/02/2010 04:31 PM, Stewart Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 03, 2010 at 12:13:31AM -0000, BJ Dierkes wrote:
>> Future thinking: It would be a good idea to have a file that lists the
>> plugins that are considered stable/production quality. For packaging
>> this makes it clear that a plugin is more-or-less safe to add to a
>> distribution set.
>>
>> Suggested:
>>
>> drizzle-XXXX.XX.XX/plugin/STABLE
>>
>>
>> A flat file that lists plugin names that are stable. With the number of plugins it will be difficult for a package maintainer to keep up on discussion lists and what not to know where a plugin is in its development cycle.
>
> We could also have this in the plugin.ini and have a configure option
> or something....
>
>

I think I prefer having a list. It makes it easy for packagers to read
and easy to maintain.

On the other hand, we could just add an "experimental" option to
plugin.ini, and not have those plugins installed by default unless
--with-experimental is provided, or the plugin was explicitly requested.

The STABLE file, though, is great, since it doesn't require me to write
any more code.

Monty

Lee Bieber (kalebral) on 2010-04-21
Changed in drizzle:
assignee: nobody → Monty Taylor (mordred)
Lorenzo De Liso (blackz) on 2010-05-15
Changed in drizzle:
importance: Undecided → Wishlist
status: New → Triaged
Lee Bieber (kalebral) on 2011-01-24
summary: - RFE: Maintain a list of 'stable' plugins in the source [packaging]
+ RFE - Maintain a list of 'stable' plugins in the source [packaging]
Monty Taylor (mordred) on 2013-08-11
Changed in drizzle:
assignee: Monty Taylor (mordred) → nobody
To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  Edit
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers