User forums > General (but related to Code::Blocks)
New Plugin: wxCrafter Integration with CodeBlocks
MortenMacFly:
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on May 16, 2014, 09:25:37 am ---
--- Quote from: MortenMacFly on May 16, 2014, 06:39:48 am ---...we can integrate this plugin through svn::externals...
--- End quote ---
Won't work he is using git.
--- End quote ---
Thats why I wrote:
--- Quote from: MortenMacFly on May 16, 2014, 06:39:48 am ---Another options is (how we do it i.e. with the FortranProject plugin) that you use SVN sow we can integrate this plugin through svn::externals.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on May 16, 2014, 09:25:37 am ---And I'm generally against adding every single plugin in the plugins/contrib subdir.
We should try to make things easier for plugin writers (stable api/abi, etc) instead.
--- End quote ---
I think this is another topic. For now, all I am thinking of is that you can have a single build with relevant external plugins so they make it into nightlies but being managed by an own person not necessarily a member of the C::B development team. With relevant I mean plugins that have a stable development team (so they don't get stalled) and that provide important (new) features. So I am far away from putting "everything" into contrib. In fact I want to put into contrib only whats available in a long-term period. And I believe with Eran thats the case. I would be happy if everything in contrib is a svn::external repo and managed by somebody else.
About the none-OSS - that's another story. In fact I played with wxCrafter and it has some advantages over wxSmith (though I still prefer using wxSmith myself). There is a freeware version which I would expect remains free (if not we can still remove it at that time). In the end we also have interfaces to commercial compilers like MSVC or Intel which is even worse. Should we remove those, too then?
eranif:
--- Quote --- would you want us to integrate this permanently into the SVN source tree?
--- End quote ---
This will be more than great
--- Quote ---I'll try to compile/use this tool.
--- End quote ---
Let me add a CMakeLists.txt file so you can generate a Code::Blocks project with it (atm , I used codelite to build it)
--- Quote ---Another options is (how we do it i.e. with the FortranProject plugin) that you use SVN sow we can integrate this plugin through svn::externals. This way you would have full access to the repo and it would be one of yours...
Just share your thoughts...
--- End quote ---
I can move the plugin sources to SF and use SVN - this is not a problem at all by me ( I have no preferences for git over svn )
Eran
MortenMacFly:
--- Quote from: eranif on May 16, 2014, 12:34:15 pm ---I can move the plugin sources to SF and use SVN - this is not a problem at all by me ( I have no preferences for git over svn )
--- End quote ---
I think that would be the best solution for both sides unless we cannot find an agreement within the team.
ToApolytoXaos:
If wxCrafter was fully FOSS-ed would be more than convenient for many, I'm sure. But my major concern is about its license.
Does not this affects Code::Blocks's concept or are there any plans to move plugin to a more "permissive" license (business-wise that is)?
This is something that concerns me greatly and I would like some clarifications please.
stahta01:
--- Quote from: ToApolytoXaos on May 21, 2014, 12:15:18 pm ---If wxCrafter was fully FOSS-ed would be more than convenient for many, I'm sure. But my major concern is about its license.
Does not this affects Code::Blocks's concept or are there any plans to move plugin to a more "permissive" license (business-wise that is)?
This is something that concerns me greatly and I would like some clarifications please.
--- End quote ---
You are already allowed to use closed source plugins; how do you think it can get more "permissive" license (business-wise that is)?
Tim S.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version