Michael Rueger writes:
bryce@kampjes.demon.co.uk wrote:
Why not just add the plugin's to the VMMaker package?
I don't see any gain for having another official plugin package besides VMMaker. It'll have the main problem and advantage of VMMaker of central ownership.
That's not what I suggested, just a naming scheme.
I also don't think that all plugins will be centrally maintained, as that would require write access of every plugin maintainer to the VM repository.
Michael
But Monticello packages are just a naming scheme. Your statement: "That would also allow to simply load all plugins into a VMMaker image by using a package 'Plugin'.". Seems to indicate to me that using the naming convention you suggested would lead to all the packages being part of a single Monticello package. Bryce