Closed orgads closed 7 years ago
Hi! At first, thanks for all these PRs. About this one: i don't think that plugin's name matters a lot, but changing it might cause some inconvenience in installing/upgrading/scripting. So i'll keep the old one for now.
How about changing it, but keeping the library target file name only? I'll try that.
AFAIK Qtc identifies plugin by its name, so it would treat renamed as new one. And "wrong" file's name with "correct" plugin's name (and visa versa) doesn't sound better then "wrong" names everywhere :) So, although the renaming idea is right in general, i don't think it's worth making it.
It works fine here. Qtc uses the json file for the name, the file name shouldn't really matter.
If you insist, I'll keep the plugin name unchanged, but I'd still want to change at least internal and display names.
I'm still holding the point, that having equally (even not so precise) named entities is better then having a mess. Renaming plugin's name in json file or internal constants will lead to loss of user settings. Renaming file's name - to duplicate plugins after updating. Changing namespace/class names is acceptable, but i've told about it in the beginning. And the main doubt is a reason of changes: i just don't see any real advantages here. Such renaming doesn't clarify anything or fix conflicts - it's just a matter of taste.
Actually what disturbed me were the display names. I care less for the file name or the plugin name, but having a tab named "QtcCppcheck" in Analyzer is bad...
Well, that's acceptable. UI text does not impact on anything except translations. I'll change it.
Just a proposal. None of Qtc plugins (at least the built in ones) has this prefix...