'Re: I don't like "Python plugins"'

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kwrite-devel
Subject:    Re: I don't like "Python plugins"
From:       totte <totte () tott ! es>
Date:       2013-05-08 20:17:11
Message-ID: 1859693.aHoR3CFT06 () daffodil
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wednesday 08 May 2013 21:28:07 Dominik Haumann wrote:
> On Wednesday, 8. May 2013 16:17:06 Joseph Wenninger wrote:
> > But why a tree, wouldn't it better to just merge the lists of the
> > providers? Why does a user care, if the plugin is written in C++, Python,
> > JavaScript, ....?
> 
> Right. It should just be an item in the list, no tree, please. It would
> expose information most of the users will never understand, for nothing.
> 
> > I think, it would be even better if the list could show the python
> > plugins,
> > even if PATE is not loaded and load pate on demand. python plugins +
> > desktopfiles and automatic dependency resolution
> 
> Yes, the correct solution is that all python plugins provide a .desktop
> file. The contents then would basically look like:
> 
> [Desktop Entry]
> Type=Service
> ServiceTypes=Kate/PythonPlugin
> X-KDE-Library=python-plugin-folder or so...
> X-Kate-Version=3.0
> Name=Plugin name
> Comment=Plugin description
> 
> The Kate plugin manager would then query for both, "Kate/Plugin"
> ServiceTypes and "Kate/PythonPlugin". As soon as such a plugin is loaded,
> Kate
> automatically loads the Pate-host, and then forwards the call to the Python-
> Plugin to load the correspronding plugin.
> 
> 
> For this to happen and accept in Kate, I'd like to have a rather tight
> review of what the PythonPlugin with respect to the following items:
> 
> 1. Which API does the PythonPlugin provide? All of interfaces/kate/* ?
>    My requirement would be: 100% of this interfaces should be implemented.
> 
> 2. What additional features does the PythonPlugin give in addition to the
>    interfaces in interfaces/kate/* ?
>    My requirement: Keep it as low as possible, preferrably close to 0
> addons. Why? Because IF you need addons, these are most likely also usable
> for C++ plugins. And in that case, it should be properly exposed and
> implemented in interfaces/kate/*
> 
> 3. What is missing or nice to have in interfaces/kate/?
>    Any interfaces you need and miss?
> 
> Finally a remark: Currently, all Python plugin are completely hidden behind
> the Pate-host plugin. And that is a tremendous advantage, since it keeps all
> the rest of Kate untouched. This also means you are flexible to change API,
> for instance. Once Python support gets more pulled into Kate itself,
> chaning this will be much harder in the long run.
> 
> I'd prefer to have all the python plugins listed along with all the other
> plugins. However, I'd rather prefer not to rush this, and if needed only put
> this very late into KDE 4.11 (e.g. 4.11.8), or even KDE 5.
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Dominik
> 
> > Am 08.05.2013 um 15:30 schrieb "Philipp A." <flying-sheep@web.de>:
> > > i have a more radical idea: get rid of the separate Paté plugin list.
> > > 
> > > for the end user (as you said) it's not clear that Paté just enables
> > > another list of plugins, which makes those plugins unnecessarily hidden.
> > > also i as end user wouldn't care where the plugins i enable come from.
> > > 
> > > ————
> > > 
> > > i think we should
> > > 1. if it's not already done, make the plugin list extensible by allowing
> > > adding more plugin providers>
> > > 
> > >    make the plugin list into a treeview (like the Paté plugin list is)
> > >    with each provider being a node, and it's plugins being a tree below
> > >    that.>
> > > 
> > > 2. split Paté into such a plugin provider and a plugin that provides
> > > Paté's remaining functionality (the documentation tab and the "reload
> > > modules" button for Paté plugin developers)
> > > 
> > > ————
> > > 
> > > mockup: http://i.imgur.com/amkeQS6.png
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 2013/5/8 J. Pablo Martín Cobos <goinnn@gmail.com>
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > I don't like the name of the "Python plugins"... With this name I would
> > > think that these are plugins for Python, plugins with features to
> > > python.... but this is not true. There are features to python, js, c++,
> > > xml, etc
> > > 
> > > I think that we should change this name and the description, "Pâté host
> > > for Python Plugins".
> > > 
> > > I think that the name could be: "Python plugin engine", and the
> > > description, "If you enable this plugin you will have another list of
> > > the
> > > plugins write in python".
> > > 
> > > do you think about this??
> > > 
> > > Best regards,
> 
> _______________________________________________
> KWrite-Devel mailing list
> KWrite-Devel@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kwrite-devel

I still wish for a more official (or so to speak) Python API for Kate, as 
already somewhat indirectly stated in this bug report: 
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312169. It's really a mess of an 
interface for a normal user who has little to no understanding of Kate's 
internals.
_______________________________________________
KWrite-Devel mailing list
KWrite-Devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kwrite-devel

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 