+1 to these, but let's make the sandbox plugins distinct. Let's also demote to the sandbox anything that hasn't had a release yet.
- Brett Brian E. Fox wrote: > I've been looking at some plugins in the sandbox and I see some issues: > > 1. If sandbox plugins deploy sites, (as they probably should so they get > some visability), the scm connections are wrong because they inherit > from the mojo parent. > 2. Some plugins have the name maven-xxx-plugin instead of xxx-maven-plugin > 3. Many plugins aren't even posted on the mojo site. > > I'd like to have a vote on these issues: > > 1a. Should we create a mojo-sandbox parent and have sandbox plugins > derive from here? This way we can set the scm urls and anything else > that comes along here. Only the parent section would need to change when > a plugin graduates from the sandbox. > > - OR- > > 1b. Keep deriving from mojo parent, but add instructions to site to tell > devs how to override the scm connection when added to sandbox and add > instructions to guidelines for release to have devs remember to remove > the override when graduating. > > > 2. Should we correct the plugin names? > > 3. Should all sandbox plugins be added to the mojo sandbox site? > > Thx. > > >
