[Qgis-developer] Re: ideas for developpers)

[Borys Jurgiel]

> it would be great if you add this functionality!

With pleasure, I hope to get down to this on Thursday.

> In fact, this is something that I have in my head for some time
> already: to connect plugin installer with plugin manager. In fact it's
> not really hard and I'm willing to do that, so far I just don't have
> the concept how this should be done. But e.g. extension manager in
> firefox3 looks like a good inspiration: divided into two tabs: one for
> management of installed plugins (enable/disable, uninstall), other for
> searching and installing new plugins.
>
> I have also thought about rewriting plugin installer in C++ to include
> it directly in QGIS, but it would have some drawbacks (like absence of
> zip decompression in Qt) and would add a lot of unneccessary work. So
> binding the installer to plugin manager looks like a way to go - for
> start we can just put a button "plugin installer" to the plugin
> manager dialog.

Ok, so I'll implement all the installing/uninstalling/upgrading and notifying 
stuff in the Installer. It should be easy and quick. 

I'm afraid the categorisation must wait, as we don't manage befre 0.11 
freeze - however we still can (and should) to elaborate some rules for plugin 
developers, as standard category names and one location for all plugins in 
QSettings.

> >      Plugins/$PLUGIN_NAME        = bool
> >      PythonPlugins/$PLUGIN_DIR   = bool
> >
> These values indicate whether a plugin is enabled or not. What doesn't
> correspond in your case?

Ok, everything works. I just have a number of out-of-date etries, which remain 
switched to True, though its directories was removed or renamed long time 
ago. Furthermore, I've noticed a confusing inconsistency in the "Plugins/" 
branch - it contains both C++ and Python plugins, but value is working only 
for C++ plugins (the python ones are always set to False). So I'll take look 
at the code of the Manager for better understanding the way it uses these two 
branches. Nevermind ;)

> AFAIK it's perfectly okay to use LGPL stuff in GPL software because
> LGPL is less strict variant of GPL useful mainly for libraries.

Thanks!

Cheers,
B.