[Qgis-developer] Python plugins mandatory metadata

[Vincent Picavet]

Hello,

> >> Il 25/08/2014 17:06, Tim Sutton ha scritto:
> >>> I agree they should remain optional for now.
> >> 
> >> After a few months of managing the plugin approval queue, I still
> >> do not understand what is the advantage of having plugins without
> >> a repo and bugtracker. I agree that a home page is not a
> >> necessity.
> > 
> > +1 Moreover, plugins are GPL licenced, hence the source code should
> > be shared when a plugin is distributed. Python is a script
> > language, but still there are some source which should not go into
> > the final plugin package (.ui files typically). Therefore, a plugin
> > _must_ have a full source code available somewhere, and a
> > repository is a logical place for this.
> > 
> > Globally it is about improving the global quality of the software,
> > and these steps are the basics a plugin developer should provide.
> 
> Yes but there are always going to be exceptions to this and I dont
> believe we should make having these items a sticking point e.g.:
> 
> * some one in a corporate environment can't easily make a website for
> the plugin they write
> * Someone in a coprporate environment works in a repo behind a firewall
> * a bug tracker is behind a corporate firewall

If someone wants to have a closed environment for their plugin / application 
development based on QGIS, then they can setup a closed plugin repository.

We are talking about enforcing rules on the official QGIS plugin repository, not 
the other ones, aren't we ?

> As Ale says, its not that we should encourage people not to have these
> things, but we should not penalise them for it unduly if they don't.

Free software is about open development, not only open licence. We enforce 
the licence, but it is from my point of view not enough to ensure a piece of 
code is called free software.

> I think there are other things that would be more interesting to
> mandate e.g.:
> 
> * standardised documentation
> * HIG compliance
> * Including a license file

Both points are not mutually exclusive (nor exhaustive).

> I would still like to see us reach a point where we have 'best of
> breed', 'sanctioned' plugins, and the 'wild west' differentiated for
> the users.

One of the question I often hear is "what are the best QGIS plugins ?". I 
would like to be able to answer this question with "Official QGIS repository are 
all good".
Or maybe we want a QGIS official plugin repository, and a "staging" or 
"contrib" one, with different levels of rules and quality ?

Vincent

> 
> Regards
> 
> Tim
> 
> > Vincent _______________________________________________
> > Qgis-developer mailing list Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer