Re: [Ranger-users] ranger infrastructure

[Joshua Landau]

On 30 April 2013 02:08, Roman Z. <address@hidden> wrote:

On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 06:01:08PM +0100, Joshua Landau wrote:

> No, see, no-one's going to write plugins until there's plug-in
> compatibility. If you've a package manager, that'll take the role of
> turning commands, themes and hacks into plugins. This needs to be done
> first, I think. That said, the package manager doesn't need to be built in
> - it's a plugin on Sublime Text and I'd be totally happy with it being a
> plugin for Ranger too.

That may be so, but I refuse to work on anything to promote plugin-
writing until I see some people actually making good use of that
feature.  If only to get a confirmation that the current plugin system
is usable and preferable to simply hacking the code and making a branch.

See, every time someone announced a plugin, it turned into a branch
instead, which later got merged into master.  And to be honest, that's
how I prefer it.

That'd be a fair point if not for my example of :travel. It's not the only change that's done similar (see prev posts) and that would've been in earlier if there were plugins. The way I've suggested plugins also is just a folder-isation of commands.py + search/install, hence it wouldn't impede the current branch+merge strategy. It could even allow branches to be "packages" (files, really) instead, so that the non-nerds can more easily try stuff out. Then it can be merged, and the manager can automatically clear out the old, now redundant, package.

If anything, surely you'd rather commands.py be able to avoid getting much bigger. 1k lines is approaching bloated.

Please note that I'm not stating that this has to be your endeavour. I brought it up as something I might do myself after the exam period, as it sounded cool.