| Currently we have no Tier 4 - although I know what you mean, all
    those that are currently un-categorized 
 But I would question whether Tier 3 is based on 'popularity'. It is
    split into 4 categories:
 
 
      Hudson -
        plugins developed and maintained for the Hudson community Compatible -  tested by their
        owners for compatibility between Hudson and JenkinsInstall Tested - those that, on release
        of a new plugin version, are tested by the Hudson community that
        they at least install correctly. But there is no stated
        compatibility from JenkinsOther - plugins that have not been identified as
        belonging to any of the above categories I would say that all new plugins become Tier 3 - Hudson or
    Compatible. Isn't that the case?
 
 s
 
 
 On 27/01/2012 16:36, Winston Prakash wrote:
 
      
      I didn't mean plugin author would abuse the the system. I meant
      there are many open ended questions 
 How do they know which tier their plugin belongs to?.
 Should all new plugins starts with "tier4"?.
 When do they move up the ladder tier4 -> tier3 -> tier2
      -> tier1?.
 Who will inform them now their plugin has moved from tier4 to
      tier3?
 
 - Winston
 
 On 1/27/12 8:14 AM, SUSAN DUNCAN wrote:
 
        
        I guess I want to believe that plugin authors would not abuse
        the system, surely this is a good starting point?
 rgds
 
 susan
 
 On 27/01/2012 16:00, Winston Prakash wrote:
 
          
          Susan,
 As I mentioned to Henrik earlier, tier information can not be
          in the POM file. If it is in the POM file, plugin authors can
          put their plugin to any tier1 they wish. But It has to be
          determined based on popularity of the plugin. So the
          information need to come from external list, not from POM.
 
 - Winston
 
 On 1/27/12 7:50 AM, SUSAN DUNCAN wrote:
 
            
            While we are talking about new properties for POM files
 - could we introduce one to denote the Tier of a plugin.
            then we could use this to add a field on the Plugin
            Information box on the plugin's page  (with a link to the
            tier list).  We could ask plugin owners to add it - fine for
            tier1/2 and some tier 3 - but if they do not, then an
            optional field and no harm done.
 
 I have added a tag to those tiered plugins - on each plugin
            wiki page - but it would be good to show the tier info more
            prominently when someone browses the wiki for potential
            plugins to use
 
 susan
 
 On 26/01/2012 23:04, Winston Prakash wrote:
 
              
              The plugin is identified with a JSON attribute "name" and
              display name comes from the JSON attribute "title".When the update center generator generates the JSON, from
              the  plugin POM it uses the tag <artifactId> for the
              "name" and <name>  for  "title".
 
 I like the <name> "Hudson BIRT Charts Plugin",
              because this will be used as project name in the IDE. This
              makes it easy to find the project in the list of so many
              other projects. Also the name "Hudson :: Maven 3 ::
              Plugin", tells me "Maven3" is a "Plugin" available as
              module inside the main project "Hudson".
 
 However, I agree with you that  the display name "Hudson
              BIRT Charts Plugin" in the update center has redundant
              prefix "Hudson" and suffix "Plugin".
 
 To solve this problem we could introduce a POM property
              called "displayName". Ex
 
 
 <properties>
    <displayName>Birt Chart</displayName>
</properties>The update center generator would use this property, if
              available" to fill the JSON attribute "title" or revert to
              <name> tag.
 - Winston
 
 
 On 1/26/12 12:40 PM, Henrik Lynggaard Hansen wrote:
 
                Hi
I raised an eclipse defect about aligning plugin names
(https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=369713) but I think it
warrants wider discussion.
As written in the bug report
Currently the our naming of plugins (even just within the core) seems
a bit "random".Not only is this randomness a bit ugly, it also breaks
the natural
sorting.
examples:
Hudson BIRT Charts Plugin
JCaptcha Plugin
Hudson :: Maven 3 :: Plugin
I think we should agree on a preferred naming convention and re-align
our own plugins. This convention should be posted on the wiki, so
others have a chance to follow it.
I suggest we remove both "Hudson" and "plugin" from the name as that
information is redundant in the context of the update centre. which
would lead to names such as
* BIRT Charting
* JCaptcha
* Maven 3
* Windows slaves
I am not sure if this should be done at the source level or in the update
centre .
"
I know that sometimes the name is seen outside the context of plugin
centre, and there might be useful to have both "Hudson" and "plugin"
in the name, so perhaps an idea was to support reading a property like
"hudson.hint.displayname" (same style as the netbeans hints) from the
pom.xml and if present use that instead of the normal project name.
Best regards
Henrik
_______________________________________________
hudson-dev mailing list
hudson-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/hudson-dev
 |