Re: [Rhythmbox-devel] Discussion as to whether community based external plugins could/should be in the official source-tree

[Jonathan Matthew <jonathan d14n org>]

On Sat, Nov 2, 2013 at 7:51 AM, David Mohammed <davidmohammed gmail com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>   There are a number of GPL 2 & 3 based plugins that have been converted to
> python3 and thus can & do run in the latest version of RB (below).
>
> Would Jonathan and the other rhythmbox developers consider it appropriate to
> introduce into the source-tree a community section where external developers
> could submit their pride-and-joy?

Most of the plugins you listed replace or overlap with existing
plugins. I'm not going to accept this sort of thing into the source
tree.

What would make this community plugins section different to the
existing plugins? Would someone be expected to pull in updates to
these from external repositories, redirect bug reports and feature
requests, feed back any updates that happen in the rhythmbox tree?
Would there be some expectation that these plugins are kept up to date
when interfaces change, or adapted to make use of new features?

I'm not spending all that much time on rhythmbox these days, so
anything that involves adding to my maintenance workload is probably
not going to work very well.