On Saturday, April 20, 2013 at 2:14 PM, Thomas Bruederli wrote:
till wrote:On Saturday, April 20, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Thomas Bruederli wrote:On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 2:17 AM, till <klimpong@gmail.com<mailto:klimpong@gmail.com>> wrote:On Saturday, April 20, 2013 at 1:35 AM, rodrigo wrote:Is there any particular reason the default set of included (but notactivated) plugins has not been separated out from the main repositoryinto repositories of their own? I would even argue that skins, asidefrom the default, should be separate repositories. My group manages ourinstallation with git and it would make my life a ton easier if thiswere the case.I don't remember when they were put back into the "master". They used to bemore separate.Wrong. Plugins developed and maintained by the Roundcube developersalways have been part of the master git repository together with thecode code. The planned composer-based plugin repository is meant for3rd party plugins. The main goal of that repository is to allow plugindevelopers to publish their modules on a centralized platform andallow Roundcube sysadmins to pull them into their local installations.That isn't necessary for core plugins because they're already part ofthe distribution package.The plugins were in their own tree in SVN. Maybe that's what I meant.Yes, they were back in the SVN times. But even there, it was one repositoryholding all plugins not individual repositories for each plugin.But I don't say that moving the core plugins to composer is a bad idea. Sofar my intention of the plugin repository didn't consider that step but itmight.