From: Michael Carr <cstrife89_at_gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 15:39:39 -0500

On 02/02/2012 03:08 PM, Marcin Bukat wrote:
> Hello rockboxers,
>
> Following discussion on IRC
> (http://www.rockbox.org/irc/log-20120202#12:14:31) I would like to
> rise the issue with current state of plugins. We have lots of this,
> almost every one have separate keymap (only a few use PLA). Making
> plugins to compile is tedious work during porting. In configure you
> can disable all plugins but this is not a solution as usually you want
> at least test_ family to compile and compiling plugins separately is a
> pain. The outcome of IRC discussion is twofold:
> 1) Rework plugin building so it would be easy to enable particular
> plugin on a given target. If someone wants particular plugin he is
> welcome to provide a patch.
> 2) Relax the requirements for target to become stable. I mean we could
> agree on minimal subset of plugins (and documentation in manual)
> needed for a given port to fulfill stable criteria. Rockbox is about
> playing music and not playing games and watching rotating cube after
> all.
>
> So I would like You to express your opinion.
>
> Marcin
>
I'm for solution #2. Anyone that comes to Rockbox for Doom or Rockboy
and stays on Rockbox for them is not the target audience. A notice can
be put in the manual and on the target's Wiki page about the plugin
status, with a reminder that plugins are more like optional "apps" than
core components.
Received on 2012-02-02