[sldev] Re: Plugin architecture
sldev at bushing.mm.st
Wed Feb 21 20:02:53 PST 2007
On Feb 21, 2007, at 5:55 PM, soft at softnoel.org wrote:
>> This assumes that we should accept new plugins on the fly, without
>> restarting the client. I'm not sure that's a reasonable design goal.
>> If plugins were totally asynchronous like that, how would you
>> start them
>> when SL started? Or should they sit there as little daemons or
>> whenever the system is booted, just waiting for SL to start?
> Tank treads model aside, accepting/enabling/disabling new plugins
> restarting is desirable.
What's a "tank treads model"?
> It will shorten iteration times for plugin developers.
> It will enable restarting the viewer in a plugin-free "safe mode"
> and manually reenabling plugins one at a time after a crash.
Neither of those features requires the ability to install a new
plugin without restarting.
> It will make technologies like self-updating plugins [possible]
... nor does this one. Firefox lets you do all of those things, but
will only install / uninstall / upgrade after restarting.
> [...] and LL-triggered plugin invalidation possible.
Whoa. Everyone, raise your hand if you think this is a good idea.
More information about the SLDev