Virgil Bucoci <vbucoci@???> writes:
> * slashdot.py
> * feedwise.py
> * imgstrip.py
> I don't know if having multiple plugins doing basically the same thing
> (feedwise already has 2 and now comes a 3rd, slashdot is going to have
> 2 as well now) is really good.
Thanks -- I've added all of those. I've pulled the older versions of
slashdot and feedwise and replaced them with yours (the old versions
are still present in the same directory if anyone wants them, they're
just not linked to from the web page any more).
If you feel like adding config options to feedwise/slashdot to mimic
the old behaviour then feel free, but I'm not convinced it's worth it;
people using the old versions aren't forced to upgrade, and the new
versions are just as easy to set up and less likely to break in
conjunction with other plugins.
> Also, there are some plugins that don't really play nice with other
> plugins. tagcat.py is the one I hit. It binds to
> output_write_files hook that completely by passes
> rawdog.write_output_file, [...] It would be better if one hook
> wouldn't shadow other hooks.
I think tagcat's the plugin that's most intimately entwined with the
guts of rawdog -- even more so than the plugins I've written! I'd
prefer it if plugin authors did multiple output files using the
approach that paged-output takes (calling back into rawdog).
There's already a warning in the PLUGINS documentation about this
hook-shadowing problem; it'll be a bit stronger in the next release.
I can't see a way of getting rid of this problem entirely, because the
point of the output_write_files hook is to make it possible to
completely replace the output method -- the best I can do is document
the problem and make the available methods on rawdog as flexible as
possible.
--
Adam Sampson <ats@???> <http://offog.org/>
_______________________________________________
rawdog-users mailing list
rawdog-users@???
http://lists.us-lot.org/mailman/listinfo/rawdog-users
