Extrapolated from the relevant information in the post (a single data point), that is a solid hypothesis.
Extrapolated from the relevant information in the post (a single data point), that is a solid hypothesis.
That fills me with determination.
As Flatfire mentions, another issue can arise if plugins can modify the config. I assumed config to be read-only for the software, only editable by the admins, and never by the tools themselves.
I’d try to share the config space as much as possible. Options 1 and 3 make sense then.
What feels “right” to me, when using NixOS and its module system, is that all config has the same shape, and is therefor easily moved to a different section, or to a section that is shared by a subset of plugins.
Con: It could lead to bad practices like strengthening dependencies between plugins (if they hard code to use a specific config option of another plugin).
Pro: But if you can discourage that, or use “deprecated pointers” to the new location of an option, the ease of moving shared config options to a more generic level can make it easier to maintain the total configuration. Developers of the separate plugins can build on what others have already done, and even synergize functionality (add a convenient integration if they see another option configured).
If some options are “secret”, though, and you don’t want those shared, they should either be in their own config (easier), or you’d need some access control on the configuration storage/file for each plugin (more work). Allowing a plugin to have a separate file for credentials, for instance, could be a good choice.
That is an interesting source. Thanks for the link!
Might not be a useful plugin, but fans of Terry Pratchett might like the GNU Terry Pratchett idea. For librewolf I use this slightly updated add-on which fixes some minor issues (source available).
Heh, thanks. I did just look up what people on StackExchange thought about it, and in short: both are correct, although the word originated as a mass noun (uncountable).
I was guessing that the intended usage would be “email messages”. And I would compare it to (snail) mail. You can get a lot of letters, but it is still a lot of mail.
Thanks! I’ve used emails as a plural of email for a long time, referring to the messages. Not a native speaker, maybe it’s something Dutch people do with some loanwords. Never softwares or the (more recent) codes, though.
Falkor energy.
Is there a generic (non-brand) name for these boiling-water faucets? (That’s not a mouthful like “boiling-water faucets”). I think we call them quookers here, which is also a brand name, and I slightly dislike that practice. I mean, “brand name for generic thing” is very common, but the brands and things differ per country, so it’s like a layer of jargon to decipher.