So... What do we want to do about this? The code to implement this in Wave is sitting in my repo (https://github.com/alown/wave/releases/tag/waveextensionsgallery), and can be put in for tidying and review at any point.
I think it is worth doing, but I don't feel it is 'correct' to put it in as the default extensions source whilst WEG is hosted at/by a third-party. If WEG was donated to Apache (This was discussed in a hypothetical form), then I don't see a problem with using it. Ali On 1 May 2013 20:41, Ali Lown <a...@lown.me.uk> wrote: >> - The current gadget data includes primary and secondary categories. >>> Can you make this information available over the api? (Assuming you >>> have it?) >> The gallery does not currently allow secondary categories. Do you think >> that would be worth adding? > > I was merely raising it as a possible point. Though we don't make use > of it currently in the UI, so I don't think it is very important > concept. > >>> - Adding any of the gadgets currently results in a 'Port error: Could >>> not establish connection. Receiving end does not exist.' message from >>> Chrome 27, but seems to work fine in Firefox 19.0.2. >> What do you mean when you say “adding...gadgets”? Are the gadget URLs from >> the gallery invalid? > > This was a more general point, and not directly related to you/your > code (rather at any of the other maintainers reading this thread, to > point out that gadgets appear to be fairly broken at the moment. [When > also considering WAVE-389].) > > Ali
