[09:01:16] <ajpiano> hello #jquery-meeting lurkers
[09:01:18] <rworth> hey
[09:01:20] <danheberden> ajpiano wat
[09:01:24] <ajpiano> we are going to have a meeting about the plugins site here!
[09:01:25] <ben_alman> hiya
[09:01:37] <jzaefferer> huzza!
[09:01:46] <rworth> \o/
[09:02:03] <danheberden> totally didn't see that in the calendar
[09:02:06] <ajpiano> so ben has put a lot of time into thinking about package.json
[09:02:14] <ajpiano> i e-mailed, i think it needs to be added to the calendar
[09:02:18] <ben_alman> a fair amoint
[09:02:22] <ben_alman> amount too
[09:02:39] <ajpiano> i am in the middle of pasting and revising the original spec into the wiki as we speak
[09:03:11] <ajpiano> and pretty much the only two things we need to accomplish for this stage are tightening up those two things
[09:03:15] <ben_alman> sam made excellent points re: tagging, versions, and multiple plugins in his response to my post
[09:03:30] <ajpiano> yeah, i'm pretty inclined to follow his instincts
[09:03:37] <ben_alman> to that end, rworth have you thought about multiple plugins in ui and how that will work?
[09:03:54] <ajpiano> he seems to have the most knowledge of like, package managers of anyone else who's worked on this so far
[09:04:44] <ben_alman> because with the proposed package.json format, while a plugin can have multiple sets of distribution files, it will only have one title, one description, one version, one set of deps, etc
[09:04:53] <rworth> I'm more troubled than ever before
[09:05:09] <ajpiano> it seems like we had a semi-solid idea
[09:05:14] <ben_alman> and as such there'd be no way for any jquery ui sub-plugin to appear on the site as a "first class citizen"
[09:05:21] <rworth> I totally get the need to keep things simple, but I can't think of what it means for something like jQuery UI
[09:05:27] <ben_alman> yeah
[09:05:36] <ajpiano> all the jquery ui plugins are always at the same version number, however
[09:05:52] <ben_alman> between jquery ui and my understanding of what goes into much smaller multi-plugin packages, we really need to hash this out
[09:06:03] <ben_alman> ajpiano, yes the whole "Suite" is at the same version
[09:06:13] <rworth> we can't possible have each widget in its own repo, and even if we did, it would introduce the problem we want to avoid by having them in a suite, they actually do share all that info
[09:06:13] <ajpiano> should we skype and just like, decide this please?
[09:06:15] <ben_alman> but you wouldn't be able to list accordion separately from tabs in the plugins index
[09:06:16] <rworth> like version, etc.
[09:06:31] <ben_alman> because there wouldn't exist metadata to describe them all
[09:06:34] <danheberden> rworth that's not going to be realistic for ui, or most other people
[09:06:34] <ben_alman> i'm happy to skype
[09:06:47] <rworth> yup
[09:06:53] <rworth> even with tool support
[09:06:59] <rworth> skype +1
[09:07:06] <ben_alman> ui could be a big repo with 20 submodules
[09:07:16] <ben_alman> each submodule is a sep plugin repo, dunno anyways
[09:07:28] <ajpiano> quite frankly, my instinct is that like, we shouldn't organise this entire thing around its repercussions for jquery ui
[09:07:42] <ben_alman> but we should at least consider them
[09:07:47] <ben_alman> just to see what the gap is
[09:22:25] <ben_alman> https://github.com/documentcloud/underscore/blob/master/package.json
[12:29:15] <Guest40830> Hello everyone