You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is just an issue to leave here for the future to gather ideas around user contributed plugins and if we should or shouldn't create a basic contribution guideline (nothing crazy). It could have for instance something like:
Has to be installed through composer
In addition, it can be installed through copying to lib folder
README has to have an install, basic usage, and some basic documentation sections
Repository has to start with fatfree- or f3-
Removing plugins that haven't been touched/updated in x years.
Etc.
These are just some ideas. The idea behind this is that while the plugin authors have good intentions, to a certain degree anything we place on the docs website reflects the image we have as a framework. If we have a bunch of sub par plugins, or plugins that are outdated, it reflects that the framework may be grouped into that as well. I think it would put a damper on any momentum we are trying to create for the framework to be more popular to help other people (especially those learning to code).
Any other thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I'd also go with the idea, that we keep plugins off of the official docs and tell people to use Github's topics instead. We could then just link to https://github.com/topics/fatfree-plugin and people would be able to get a list of plugins.
This is just an issue to leave here for the future to gather ideas around user contributed plugins and if we should or shouldn't create a basic contribution guideline (nothing crazy). It could have for instance something like:
fatfree-
orf3-
These are just some ideas. The idea behind this is that while the plugin authors have good intentions, to a certain degree anything we place on the docs website reflects the image we have as a framework. If we have a bunch of sub par plugins, or plugins that are outdated, it reflects that the framework may be grouped into that as well. I think it would put a damper on any momentum we are trying to create for the framework to be more popular to help other people (especially those learning to code).
Any other thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: