The location of plugins is not a backward compatibility issue. From that point of view, we could relocate plugin files. The reason I do not want to do is that it is an implementation issue that requires rewriting a lot of web2py code (particularly for the bytecode-compile functionality), that will make web2py slower, not faster, and does not seem to add any new feature (except the relocation itself). The only argument I have heard in favor of relocation is in fact that code will look cleaner with a new plugins location. I do not disagree but to users of admin things will look exactly the same (because of the logical location according to admin is already the one you suggest), to users of the shell models would be scattered and it would be more difficult to identify order of execution, and you will get a little bit of cleanness is user code at the expense of lots of dirt in web2py code (lots of if statements to find out what is where).
I will not do it. If somebody wants to write a fully working proof of concept implementation to demonstrate that 1) it is not slower; 2) it can be done without too much extra complexity in web2py source, I may take the patch. Massimo On Mar 12, 4:39 am, Alex Fanjul <alex.fan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Massimo, > > I haven't said that plugins should have to depend on others, but they > should be able to access/play with others to make a trully plugins > central network, the dependencies are resoluble at highly level with an > exposed convention API like: > > plugin_most_active_users.requires=['comments-1.x.x', 'auth-2.x.x'] > plugins['tag_cloud'].requires =['tags-1.2.x'] > > Its only an idea. > > The backward compatibility breaks with the heritance folder structure > (as I though you said), isn't it? > > *App Level: (example: plugin for commets)* > web2py/applications/my_app/plugins/my_plugin/modules/module*.py > web2py/applications/my_app/plugins/my_plugin/views/views*.py > web2py/applications/my_app/plugins/my_plugin/controllers/controllers*.py > web2py/applications/my_app/plugins/my_plugin/static/statics*.jpg > > *Framework Level (example: plugin for ckeditor Editor, or last Wes James > coda helper)* > web2py/plugins/my_plugin/controllers/controllers*.py > web2py/plugins/my_plugin/views/views*.py > > The way to ordering load is down-to-up I think, like kohana > does:http://docs.kohanaphp.com/general/modules,http://v3.kohanaphp.com/guide/about.filesystem. > > Also it's very important the hooks > <http://docs.kohanaphp.com/general/events> & events > <http://docs.kohanaphp.com/general/events> system, as both of you > (thadeus, Massimo) talked at the end of the chat: > > There is no calling for new Cache system at all...just was an example... > > regards, > Alex > > El 12/03/2010 5:26, mdipierro escribi�: > > > > > I agree with most of what you say. > > > 99.99% of apps use a single database and so will plugins. This is > > because they needs auth to do anything meaningful. > > > I do not think it is a good idea to have plugins that depend on each > > other. dependencies are a mess to manage. In any language and any OS I > > ever used. plugins with dependencies are cause for trouble. > > > But I agree that we may build groups of plugins that cooperate for > > some specific tasks (like share access to certain tables and or > > certain web services). This will happen for plugins geared toward > > specific types of apps so we should not over-engineer it now. > > > I do not think we need a 2.0 for those things that you asked. We will > > get there in small steps and, at this point, I do not see why any of > > those improvements should be inconsistent with backward compatibility. > > > What's your wish list for cache? I never heard anybody calling for a > > new cache system. > > > Massimo > > > On Mar 11, 9:02 pm, Alex Fanjul<alex.fan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Very interesting and constructive IRC meeting, congrats to all. After > >> reading all text I have some comments: > > >> - Most of the meeting (50% at least) was concerning about *how many and > >> what databases should plugins have access to*...it seems the most > >> headache for all, BUT, I'm pretty sure that 99% of today real WEB > >> applications (and very complex ones) in world uses no more than 1 > >> database: think of Magento's, Elgg's, Zimbra's, Active Collab's, > >> Twitter's, OpenBravo's, Wordpress's, Drupal's, etc. All of them use only > >> ONE database (maybe clustered, spreaded, mirrored, etc. but ONE), and > >> many of them has very complex plugins systems. The "problem" here, is > >> that with web2py its very simple and easy to create a new database: just > >> do "db=DAL(...)"... and many times we are even "confusing" (in the right > >> sense) databases with tables... A game for us: Tell me more than 2 real > >> web applications using more than one database. A reflection: I would be > >> very afraid if after installing 20 plugins (as I have in my latest > >> drupal installation) I bump into 20 (or 15 or 10 or even 5) new > >> databases in my phpmyadmin/pgadmin. Yea: be generic and assume all > >> posible cases... but.... > >> I think Thadeusb was in the right direccion in some comments...asumming > >> a worst case of ONE shared db for plugins. moreover this would > >> simplified things, right? > > >> - "Turicas: should a plugin access other plugins' data?" --> "thadeusb: > >> Turicas: I would think no, because a plugin should be self contained." > >> In this case I disagree, the plugins -for sure- should be able to access > >> to other plugins data/functions, because as centralplugins grow up, many > >> of them will be based on others to not reinvent the wheel, so *we will > >> need a strong convention in exposing API for functions, objects, etc.* > >> (think of a "plugin_most_active_users" based on thadeus "plugin_commets"). > > >> - Finally I believe that a "heritance folder convention" where you can > >> override/extend parents functionality/skins/models like the great > >> kohana's plugin system (someone mentioned) is the best way to achive a > >> "easy" and "comprensible" plugin system. Yes, that would suppose a big > >> change and probably a backward compatible inflexion point, but as > >> Massimo said, talk me about functionallity not about implementation. > >> Concerning this, and to be honest I'm always thinking of a Massimo > >> annunce saying: "Web2py 2.0 Released: the new easier, faster and even > >> more powerful python web framework with new DAL, new Plugin System, new > >> Cache System, new CSS/Form system, etc. (ops but without 1.x backwark > >> compatibility sorry)", but it's just a dream :-P > > >> Is there any new IRC appointment planned? > > >> Best regards, > >> Alex > > >> PD: excuse me for my english (as always) > > >> -- > >> Alejandro Fanjul Fdez. > >> alex.fan...@gmail.comwww.mhproject.org > > -- > Alejandro Fanjul Fdez. > alex.fan...@gmail.comwww.mhproject.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "web2py-users" group. To post to this group, send email to web...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to web2py+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/web2py?hl=en.
