[ckan-dev] Documentation todo list for 2.0 release

[Ross Jones]

With the prior discussion on how compatibility will be maintained in
extensions for the 1.x branch, moving those extensions into core would mean
that the 1.x version of the extensions wouldn't get updated with fixes, so
a definite -1 from me.

I don't suppose there is any chance of standardising the docs for plugins,
so that they all look the same - it might encourage better documentation
for the plugins themselves if they had a template to work from?

Ross.


On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Sean Hammond <sean.hammond at okfn.org> wrote:

> Just to say that having the plugins in the core git repo seems
> irrelevant to me as far as things like privacy concerns and ckan setup
> go, the plugin will still be disabled by default and you'd only have
> to go through the plugin setup to enable it if you wanted to use it,
> it would still be a plugin and not part of ckan core itself, the only
> difference would be source code in the same repo.
>
> I do agree about keeping ckan core itself lean.
>
> I'd be fine with keeping plugins out of the core repo as long as we
> also kept the plugins' docs out of the core docs. Otherwise I think it
> gets awkward.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ckan-dev mailing list
> ckan-dev at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/ckan-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/ckan-dev/attachments/20130306/c3788b57/attachment-0001.html>