On Wed, 9 May 2018, Jo wrote:
I guess it all depends on availability of time of the core team. What
surprises me is that plugins that everybody probably have installed like
buidings-tools and utilsplugin2 are not 'adopted' into core.
No single plugin has more than 50% user base. Even not the ones
automatically installed with windows installer.
That probably tells you something about how likely it is that others
would be.
No. It tells you nothing.
As utilsplugin2 is specifically our "not ready or wanted for core"
test plugin your comment is even less useful.
2018-05-09 7:25 GMT+02:00 Jiri Hubacek <[email protected]>:
I would like to ask question about the JOSM enhancements. Where is the
line between functionality acceptable upstream and the feature that
should be in separate plugin?
The concrete example - I wrote some script for automatic creation of
residential area around the selected buildings. I rewrote it to Java to
be able to push it upstream but it looked too specific to be included in
"Tools" menu. So I created the plugin (mapathoner). Are there any
guidelines for these decisions?
There are guidelines, but they are not easy to explain. It is a personal
decision based on a few major questions:
- is the function interesting for a large part of the user base
- does it fit into the overall concept of the editor
- is it mature enough to be in the core
- do we want to be responsible for it in the future
- does the LICENSE match the core requirements
- is there already a similar functionality
So chances for generic important mature functions with no similar feature
existing are good. For others not.
Ciao
--
http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)
