[sos-devel] s/plugin/module/g?

[Bryn M. Reeves]

On 02/08/2012 08:07 PM, Jesse Jaggars wrote:
> I can see a small benefit in calling them modules, since they literally 
> are python modules. My only reservation would be that module doesn't 
> really explain what purpose they serve, although plugin is just as bad.

Right :)

I find myself using module as a least-worst kind of thing.

> I have been operating under the assumption that the 'plugin' interface was
> intended to be stable. I did make alterations, but I also believe we should
> bump the major version number to reflect the change.

I think there are two problems with the interface as it stands: in the
past it's never really been well-defined or had guarantees and because
of the way the plugins operate we've sometimes had to make changes
across whole sets of files in updates. Out of tree modules make that
even more complex as you have to chase them down and get updates there too.

The other problem is that the plugins also create an interface to
consumers of the data. This has the same problem with definition (or a
lack of it) but that's something we've already talked about improving.

> In terms of pure terminology, I don't think plugin is a better or worse term
> than module, so either term is acceptable to me.

No strong attachments here either apart from the connotations of plugin
but I can't think of anything better so far..

Cheers,
Bryn.