Plug-in capability

[KyferEz]

I mentioned this to you in am email a month or so ago, and you didn't seem to want to persue the idea. However, I highly recommend looking into it.

You stated that the app has to be built from the ground up to support plugins, but I disagree. Is it a lot of work to make plugins an option this late in the game? Sure. Is it worth it? YES!

There are many of us who are software developers who would be willing to write a plugin or two so some new features could be added without having to pester you about them.

It also will help alleviate the "this program already has too many features" conception that some have. Many of your existing features could be organized and converted to a couple of plugins so that only the users who want those features would install them.

It could also make adding new features to your own product easier, because they could be released as a plugin instead of a new version.

What does everyone else think? POLL!

KyferEz

[KyferEz]

For everyone who is an end user and not a developer, plugins are adventageous for you because features that the admin may not be willing to implement could possibly be offered via a plugin.

This means you can plead your case for new features to more than just one developer, and have an even better chance of getting your request granted.

So I ask everyone that's a member to vote on this idea, and make a responce if you like. I see many have viewed this thread, but few have voted... (granted some of this may be due to visitors)

Do you think this is a valuable feature, or am I way off in left field?

KyferEz

[j_c_hallgren]

I'll admit I have extremely limited expertise in this area...but as a former systems analyst/programmer, I can provide a couple of thoughts:

To support plug-ins, AFAIK, either one of these two options would be needed:
1) Go open source, which just doesn't work when you're trying to make an income from product...(and Linux support is a totally different animal)
2) Create coding for and provide extensive documention on API's, which would require far too much time for a solo developer...

[JustinF]

While in theory supporting plug-ins would be cool, I have to agree with jc. I also am a programmer and I can just imagine the kind of work that would go into creating all the APIs needed to provide decent functionality to plug-in creators. Especailly harder would be "converting" an app that wasn't designed with plug-in functionality in mind to a pluggable app. Now, that's not to say that it can't be done, because it most certainly can be, but it would take a lot of work (I would imagine).

So, again, I suppose it would be cool to support plug-ins (and heck, I might even be tempted to write one), I can certainly understand why they're not.

[jacky]

Pretty much what they said

I'm quite sure it would require a lot of time/work to add plugin support to XY, but I'll add that I personally dont really see what kind of plugins could be done & worth all that work

[KyferEz]

I understand it would be very very difficult to implement a decent API this late in the process, and for even a small group of developers, would be a migrane to keep documented... But I would still like to see it done - eventually and even gradually, one piece at a time.

...I personally dont really see what kind of plugins could be done & worth all that work

For those that want them: Multi panels could be added if the API was detailed enough... Basically any feature you think of could potentially be added via plugins. The limit of possibilities is primarily in how much control the API gave.

KyferEz