A little gripe from a non Ruby programmer.

ken

I know this is to late. I know that ruby writers wish to make their plugin distinguishable. However, could you put your initials at the end of the plugin name instead in front.

When searching for a plugin, and I have some idea the what plugin does, and have some idea what the name should be, then it is easier to find the plugin.

Not to pick on anyone, to give you and idea, the new plugin "comments" is named, BGSketchup Comments in the extension menu, listed as BGSketchup-Comments in the plugin toolbar, and BGSketchup_Comments.rb in the plugin folder, and the rbz file is called Comment v1_1_0.rbz.

Now, if all these files were labeled starting with "comments", and your initials at the end of the plugin's name, some days, weeks, months and maybe years from now, I would start searching for "comments", and not some unrelated name, such as BGSketchup_comments.

Note BG, I selected your plugin, not that your plugin deserves anything but praise from me, I am just to lazy to find the plugins that have names that have no relationship the plugin function.

I know petty from someone who can't write a plugin.

Now, before TIG pulls out his hair, I fully understand having your initials in front to group your plugins, however for the plugin writers that may write one, two or a few, I believe this would help everyone.

Thanks for your replies

Ken

driven

@ken

sorry be be the barer of bad news, but the 'recommended' naming conventions for all new plugins is to add an author tag on the front of the ruby and it's folder...

the extension title and name should follow suit, however the menu item can be more helpful e.g. jcb_SphereTool.rb could be shown as Sphere Tool (jcb) in the menu.

without tagging, were in the same old boat of disorganised rubies...
john

ken

Driven

Thanks for the reply. I see now why it is happening. Guess I will just live with it, however wrong it is, ha.

Ken

tt_su

Ultimately the goal is that users doesn't have to deal with the file system to manage plugins - it would go via extensions managers such as Extension Warehouse or Plugin Store - or the likes. They present the user friendly names of plugins and hide the technical underlying design.

Aerilius

See it that way:
There is a technical name that must follow namespacing rules to keep things technically sorted (like a post address) and avoid conflicts.
Then there is a display name, that is useful, friendly, localized… The display name does not need to include any technical things or version numbers.

inteloide

Hello,

I agree with you that user should find easily the plugins files.
I will change as per Ken remarks for extension name and main extension file (not for associated folder) which is common to different folder.

It would be same remarks on the sub-menu in "Plugins" menus. By now I wrapped everything in a "BGSketchup" sub-menu but I think it would be relevant to have a "Plugins" sub-menu pattern, like :
Plugins

Components
Textures
Modification
Drawing
Camera
etc...

And instead of having a big list in the "Plugins" menu, each plugins could dispatch its own menu within the pattern above.
For that a commom plugin should be released to avoid having twice the same sub-menu.

Inteloide

JQL

Inteloide,

I believe (but I'm not certain) that way you will fail the checklist for Extension Warehouse... I guess Sketchucation Plugin Store is enough though.

I read somewhere that if you have a file called "plugin.rb" you must have a folder called "plugin"

There are better informed people that might know better though...