[Vm-dev] Re: [Pharo-project] Plugin organization

David T. Lewis lewis at mail.msen.com
Sat Jan 31 22:54:57 UTC 2009

On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 11:38:26AM -0800, Andreas Raab wrote:
> David T. Lewis wrote:
> >Some older plugins that are maintained outside of the VMMaker
> >package already use this package naming convention, hence:
> >
> >	VMConstruction-Plugins-OSProcessPlugin
> >	VMConstruction-Plugins-XDisplayControlPlugin
> >	VMConstruction-Plugins-AioPlugin
> >
> >This still looks perfectly good to me, so how about just using
> >"VMConstruction-Plugins-*" rather than "Plugins-*"?
> Maybe I'm missing something but how is any of this different from 
> VMMaker-Plugins which is the current categorization for plugins?

The classes in category VMMaker-Plugins-OSProcessPlugin would then
appear as part of the VMMaker package. If someone was maintaining
VMMaker with Monticello, and also had OSProcessPlugin (or whatever)
in their image, they would not want OSProcessPlugin to be saved as
part of the VMMaker package.

I am assuming that the plugins currently in VMMaker-Plugins will
stay there unless someone someone specifically takes maintenance
responsibility for them outside of their current home. I was also
assuming that the original naming suggestion on the pharo list
refers to plugins not currently in VMMaker (but I am not involved
with pharo so I guess I'm not certain if that is the intent).

So to summarize: If someone is going to have a new package name
for plugins outside of "VMMaker-*", it should not be called
"Plugin-*" because the name could be misleading, and it might
as well be called "VMConstruction-Plugins-*" because it is a
good name that has been in use for many years for this purpose.

Just my $0.02


More information about the Vm-dev mailing list