I experimented with plugins and I think this is a great option of ML.
Now I managed it to make a very simple timelaps plugin which adds a menu entry and is configurable. Real developer could do this much better than I did, I guess.
I wonder if seperate ML in a core and plugins would be an improvement.
The core could become smaller in size and the features could become easier to edit and change for lower skilled developers and enlarge in diversity.
Maybe I am overlooking something, but I would be interested in what other people think about it.
(http://i.imgur.com/50rZ0.jpg)
Quote from: wolf on December 12, 2012, 02:13:17 PM
I experimented with plugins and I think this is a great option of ML.
Now I managed it to make a very simple timelaps plugin which adds a menu entry and is configurable. Real developer could do this much better than I did, I guess.
I wonder if seperate ML in a core and plugins would be an improvement.
The core could become smaller in size and the features could become easier to edit and change for lower skilled developers and enlarge in diversity.
Maybe I am overlooking something, but I would be interested in what other people think about it.
I think you are right. I have not done any test with them, but the idea sounds interesting.
this is sort of like what ML is like now with the feature seperations, ie: #define FEATURE_NITRATE for bitrate menu option / functionality.
While the features are separated, they may be a little hard to find by newcomers (like me) since the different files aren't based according to their menu. For example the zebra file also contains the cropmarks features (something which isn't quite obvious to newcomers). Some sort of documentation about which file contains what would be quite useful (although for now you can open each file and look at the comments at the top).
generally: agree, ML should be more modular. its too monolithic.
but: many features need other features/code or have to suppress some features. so its hard to solve with modules.