Profiles and "disabled plugins"

[Vladimir Prus]

On Saturday 21 October 2006 14:00, Jens Dagerbo wrote:

> > > In effect a disabled plugin was blocked and for all practical purposes
> > > did not exist (for that profile). Using this system  to "clean up the
> > > ui"meant you limited what parts of KDevelop the user was allowed to use
> > > by your preference of what was nice to see in the UI.
> >
> > If "disabled plugin" functionality permanently disabled some plugins from
> > being used, and that's not desirable,
> >
> > would a reasonable fix be to change
> > the semantics of "disabled plugin" -- so that it not available initially,
> > but still can be explicitly disabled by the user?
>
> This what I did  and this should already work. See
> AppWizardDialog::openAfterGeneration() - we read the disable list and add
> it to the 'ignoreparts' list set by the template.
>
> Note that this list is only applied on project creation. After that, the
> _user's preference_ is all that matters.

Ah, so the change only makes "disabled plugin" profile thingy not working for 
already created project. Well, that's better. It still breaks some my 
use-cases, but I can handle it on my own.

> > > The current behaviour is, imho, the better way. And at least back in
> > > april, when I changed the behaviour, Alexander Dymo agreed with me. I
> > > hope he still does. :)
> > >
> > > > and what's  required in order to revive the disabled plugins
> > > > functionality?
> > >
> > > As a project template writer, to impose your preference as to what
> > > should be loaded by default - use the "<ignoreparts>" section of the
> > > template's .kdevelop file.
> >
> > I have more than one template that uses the same profile. Duplicating the
> > list of disabled plugins in each seems quite inconvenient.
>
> Agreed. (And so is the fact that a new template needs to be "registered" in
> the profile!) We should change this in KDev4. KDev3 always had the approach
> "let's load everything". Let's not make this mistake in KDev4.

I'm not sure. About you said that disabled list from profile is applied on 
project creation -- so actually, templates needed not explicit disable 
plugins. What am I missing?

> > What's worse --
> > if you already have project created with certain profile, when you
> > upgrade to current version of KDevelop, all disabled plugins will
> > magically appear.
>
> As a consequence of KDevelop3's "let's load it all" approach, yes. It's
> only a half dozen click for the poor user to correct it by unloading them
> though. And maybe she/he found some new plugins she/he liked in the
> process. I can't say I think this is serious issue.

I'm pretty sure that a new user will freak out after seeing two debuggers. But 
as I say, that's my private use case, I can handle it.

> > Having two debugger plugins show up is not very nice ;-)
>
> As far as I know, the debugger plugin needs to have changed name for this
> to be possible. Has it? Can you in fact make it load twice??

Yes, the other debugger has a different name.

- Volodya