[wp-hackers] Some Left-Field names for Canonical Plugins

[Mike Schinkel]

On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:20 AM, Matt Mullenweg wrote:
> That's spelled out pretty clearly in the blog post:
> 
> http://wordpress.org/development/2009/12/canonical-plugins/

Thanks Matt for clarifying some of the details.

So for more clarity can I assume that these plugins may be smaller general purpose plugins and not exclusively larger specialty purpose functionality?

(If yes, I will then wonder why they shouldn't just because part of the core?)

>> And could some of these canonical plugins offer functionality that is only of use to other plugin authors (i.e. a library of routines) instead of all of them being only with end-user functionality?
> 
> A library useful to many plugins should probably be in core, since that's what core is for.

From my experience unless core actually uses said functions people don't seem to want to include them.  Thus there becomes a sad grey area for shared infrastructure functionality that isn't needed by core (let's say a library for interfacing Twitter, for example); plugins that need that shared functionality all end up reinventing the wheel.  FWIW.

-Mike 

On Dec 8, 2009, at 1:20 AM, Matt Mullenweg wrote:

> On 2009-12-07 9:34 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote:
>> What's the purpose for these canonical plugins?
> 
> That's spelled out pretty clearly in the blog post:
> 
> http://wordpress.org/development/2009/12/canonical-plugins/
> 
>> Also, will these canonical plugins be listed in special place in the admin console where there is actually a list of the plugins that can be enabled (so they don't have to be so hard to discover?)
> 
> They'll definitely be featured for folks.
> 
>> And could some of these canonical plugins offer functionality that is only of use to other plugin authors (i.e. a library of routines) instead of all of them being only with end-user functionality?
> 
> A library useful to many plugins should probably be in core, since that's what core is for.
> 
>> How will these canonical plugins be decided upon?
> 
> Developer and user interest.
> 
>> Will existing ones be elevated, or will they be all new projects?
> 
> Probably a mix of both. If an existing author wants to make their plugin canonical they'll be a set of standards they can work toward.
> 
> -- 
> Matt Mullenweg
> http://ma.tt | http://wordpress.org | http://automattic.com
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers