Add section with user submitted plugins about geometry HOT 17 CLOSED

@jedahan just added you as a collaborator. You should have edit permissions once you accept it.

from geometry.

I only half agree on this. I'm ok with most of the tooling or language specific plugins as these cater to most users needs. Some like hg or exec_time could be extract to a custom section. It has to be on a case-by-case basis but if we are doing this, we should consider defining some criteria.

from geometry.

I think the criteria should be quite simple:

a) Is the target tooling current? (ie, wide use, think git vs svn)
b) Information shown is targeted towards a wide audience? (ie, useful for the common user)

For example, this one should be left out as it doesn't match point b). While this other one could be included as a custom plugin.

from geometry.

It costs very little to keep files in the main tree for now. I would not like to see geometry start to grow it's own package manager which is the road I see this going down. Until there are plugin conflicts or unmaintained packages, frmendes has been great at merging and responding to pull requests.

from geometry.

Us deciding what a wide audience is tricky - it feels good to have your patch committed upstream and increases the use of the prompt as it is easier to install and use

from geometry.

My concern is to end up with a huge number of rare and/or unused plugins because once it's merged into geometry we're then responsible for it's maintenance.

We should be able to draw the line on which plugin we want to maintain.

from geometry.

I agree with @jedahan when he says it's not that costly. I see more advantages in allowing most plugins as it increases user interaction and contribution, it's easier for users and a great byproduct (which has actually motivated me to step down a bit from responding to issues) is that there have been quite a few new contributors to open source through geometry.

After giving this a thought, I got a bit scared that having strict criteria and pushing plugins to a "User Plugins" section might put some barriers to that. People might think twice before contributing while I'd rather have a PR and give out feedback. If it turns out the plugin is really not that necessary, it's all good. Just correct the PR to add it to a README.

However, I also agree that this plugin is simply a great demonstration of sense of humor, not to be merged, and I would very much be ok with having it in a "User Plugins" section. I think I'd rather go with that and be a lot more lenient with user contributions. Accept most plugins and praise "outstanding" custom user plugins -- say if someone decides to turn geometry into all emojis -- by adding them to a public list.

Finally, I share @desyncr 's concern for unused plugin maintenance. I don't have a clear idea on what is the best option for that but I'm a bit more concerned about raising barriers to contributions than unused plugin maintenance. I'm all up for suggestions on this and would very much appreciate constructive feedback.

What do you both think?

PS:

I would not like to see geometry start to grow it's own package manager which is the road I see this going down.

I don't want to detach geometry from existing tooling and I don't want it to become its own package manager. The way I see it is that it's transforming into a tool for prompt building with sane defaults and easy customization -- the plugins. I actually think that this transformation is positive. With just a couple of lines I can completely change the look of my terminal without bringing in extra dependencies.

from geometry.

@desyncr when you say add section, where do you mean to add it?

If it is in the readme or a wiki page (or both), I think that is a great idea for people to quickly share cool stuff they have made (like any of the awesome- lists).

I think it would also be nice to add to the readme a quick 'howto use third-party geometry plugins' (clone it/zplug it somewhere, and source after geometry.zsh).

I do want to encourage users to submit their cool plugins to the main project - right now that number is small and we can take it on a case-by-case basis. Its good to think about what the maintenance cost is, but I still think its better to generally encourage open source contributions on the whole.

from geometry.

I meant a README.md. A wiki page would be better off now that I think about it.

I think it would also be nice to add to the readme a quick 'howto use third-party geometry plugins' (clone it/zplug it somewhere, and source after geometry.zsh).

This is a good idea.

from geometry.

Something like https://github.com/jedahan/geometry/wiki/Plugins , which we can link in the readme perhaps

from geometry.

Yep, sounds good to me!

from geometry.

I guess we're all on the page. Any of you want to take this or should I?

from geometry.

Its weird, every time I go to https://github.com/frmendes/geometry/wiki it just redirects to https://github.com/frmendes/geometry ...

from geometry.

@jedahan It's because it didn't existed when you visited it. I just created the main page, now you should be able to create further sections.

from geometry.

@desyncr mind sharing edit permissions?

from geometry.

@jedahan Welcome aboard!

from geometry.

Well, it's done https://github.com/frmendes/geometry/wiki/Plugins. Thanks @jedahan

I'm gonna update the page with new screenshots and probably another custom plugin.

from geometry.