Re: [anjuta-devel] Adding some filtering mechanism for plugin
- From: Johannes Schmid <jhs jsschmid de>
- To: Sébastien Granjoux <seb sfo free fr>
- Cc: anjuta-devel-list <anjuta-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: [anjuta-devel] Adding some filtering mechanism for plugin
- Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:54:24 +0100
Hi Sébastien!
* Currently, a profile (= a list of plugins) always replace the previous
one. I would like to have profiles which only modify (add) the list of
loaded plugins. The goal is to have a system profile which is never
unloaded. Currently each profile needs to include the system plugins. I
can do this by adding an attribute to each profile telling if they are
incremental or not or I can write a new
anjuta_profile_manager_push_increment function to add a profile without
unloading the previous one. Do you think that one solution is better or
do you have another idea?
I like the idea of the push_increment function because it still allows
to completely replace the profile if necessary. But in general I think
the simple push() should at least by default retain the system profile
if no special parameter is given.
* The next planned change is to improve the profile file format (so this
including the .anjuta project file). Currently you can only specify
plugin that you want to load. I would like to be able to specify plugins
that you want to disable and unload them if they are already loaded. I
will keep the compatibility with the current file format, as it is a xml
file it shouldn't be to difficult.
Anjuta should be backward compatible to the old file-format but
otherwise this looks fine to me.
* The last change on this topic is to be able to specify a different
system profile on the command line. The goal is to be able to execute
Anjuta as a quite different program. Instead, I could use directly the
name of the executable to find the profile. Do you think it's better?
Hmm, difficult questions, also depends on distributors a lot. If they
prefer having no "anjuta" executable if only the "gnome-ide" package is
installed then the latter solution sounds better but especially for
testing the command-line option sounds really useful so I think we
should go for that first.
* Another related change is to be able to check the plugin attributes
defined in the .plugin file from the plugin code. My goal is to have
more than one .plugin file for the same code. Basically, I plan to have
have two .plugin files for the project wizard which define different
attributes and are loaded in different profile. The project wizard code
should check its own attribute and do something different. By example
display only GNOME related project template if anjuta is using the GNOME
IDE profile.
Do we really need two .plugin files for this? I think the "session"
should give the required information to the plugin instead.
Regards,
JOhannes
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]