[Compcomm] Building and using the compiz-plugins-premerge stuff

[Danny Baumann]

Hi,

> I think you are looking at this from a developer of bcop
> and a developer of plugins, the 2 roles need to be separated
> somehow.
> 
> To help explain my nightmare scenario look at this situation.
> 
> A plugin developer is working hard to finish his/her wonder
> plugin.  They have finished, but then notice a change in the
> core so they update to check for compatibility.  The change
> affects the bcop generated code and they need a significant
> update to bcop before they can proceed or get their code
> working.

That's right, but it doesn't matter THAT much if you need a significant
update in BCOP or a significant update in each plugin's code. You are
right that using BCOP introduces some dependencies, but honestly I think
the cases where a big pressure exists to release a plugin until day X
are pretty rare. In that case, an older version of core could be used in
any case.
Developers are free to choose which route to go - either the "have a bit
more dependencies, but coding is easier and code may look cleaner" one
or the "no dependencies, I prefer to code my stuff for myself" one.

> > Don't you think using the metadata which must be present anyway to
> > generate that boring code part is much more elegant than having to write
> > the code by yourself?
> >   
> 
> I am very glad it is all optional and it will be possible to
> have it as a separate file or include it in the code, it looks
> like a good solution that considers everyones needs.
> 
> I believe that autogenerated code is the spawn of satan and
> code generated from xml is the spawn of satan with knobs on
> to sell to suits.  Sorry, but thats my religion ;)

Noone forces you to use BCOP ;-)

> Which to me says that bcop is now off-spec totally and you
> seem to be looking for problems to your solution.  Either
> way you are free to do what you like, but I cannot see many
> developers using bcop.  To be honest it looks like its perfect
> for group, but not much else.

It's off the original goal, but still makes definitely sense to me and a
number of other people. Programs evolving in a different direction than
the original plan was is not always a bad thing ;-)
I think it's pretty hard to tell whether future developers will choose
BCOP or not given the pretty minor number of current plugin developers.
And I also do not really see the difference between group and other
plugins when it comes to BCOP usage - perhaps you can shed a bit of
light on that?

Regards,

Danny