[Chandler-dev] [Sum] The Great Architecture Discussion of 2007

[Davor Cubranic]

On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, Phillip J. Eby wrote:

> Note, too, that nothing that is being contemplated rules out the
> possibility of having user-defined schema at a later date.  Nothing
> stops anyone from writing a plugin that contains a static schema that
> meta-models dynamic schema elements, for example.

But plugins can still define their own data types, right? The limitation
is in types of attributes these data types can include and kinds of
relations between those attributes?

> What I'm referring to is that end-user programmability of Chandler has
> not been a primary goal of Chandler development for about two years
> now, and there has been a moratorium on new investment in that
> direction.  Indeed, even platform improvement was designated as
> secondary, with priority to be given only to platform issues affecting
> the core PIM application development.

Do you by this mean third-party plugins? That they're possible, but not
actively encouraged by OSAF or work put into changing the platform APIs
to make writing those plugins easier?

Davor