Sync with Geany-Plugins?

[eht16]

What's the plan about keeping this in sync with the copy of GeanyPy in the Geany-Plugins project?
It seems a few commits here are missing in Geany-Plugins (b714087, bbfb929, maybe more).
Recently, d11b4eb was merged but in Geany-Plugins the same fix was committed with a different hash from a different commit.

I'd wish both repos were in sync.

[codebrainz]

They could be in sync if Geany-Plugins was using Git submodules, and we had a way to have both a standalone Autotools build system as well as the Geany-Plugins one. The way it is now, the maintainer of the GeanyPy fork in Geany-Plugins is required to manually keep them in sync.

[eht16]

Hmm ok. I hoped we'll get something more integrated. It's a bit a pity to see the repos are somewhat out of sync.

Who exactly is "the maintainer of the GeanyPy fork in Geany-Plugins"? @frlan @Kugel ?

[elextr]

@eht16 geanypy in Geany-Plugins is a bit unusual for historical reasons. It is not an independent plugin development, as its docs say, its a copy of this upstream with the build system changed to fit with G-P.

I made it the G-P version because @codebrainz wasn't willing/able to do the build system changes at the time. I put myself as maintainer of the G-P plugin since it would have been rude to nominate somebody else without their consent. And nobody else has offered to take over since ;) But of course its not intended that it be independently maintained separate from upstream anyway.

The intention is that things only get taken from upstream to the downstream G-P plugin when they were accepted here. But its always possible that things have been missed :)

The major changes in #37 have not yet been accepted by @codebrainz and even if he had I don't have the time at the moment to make the PR on G-P. But having been involved in its evolution its fine with me if @kugel- makes the PR on G-P, its an important upgrade and we warned about it on the geanypy plugin README (and so the website) at the 1.26 release.

[eht16]

Ok, it's fine with me if the G-P version is a bit behind the upstream here and if we have a maintainer, you, which is aware of all this. I was not, sorry.

I fully understand #37 is a heavy one and might not be merged directly, this is ok.

What about the mentioned commits above (b714087, bbfb929) and maybe more from the past which seem not to be merged?
I don't talk about merging for 1.27 but maybe afterwards so they don't get lost.

[elextr]

Yeah, it should be reviewed, I know @codebrainz directly committed some things to G-P but that was some time ago, and as I said in #37 I thought he had an auto-updater script so I wasn't watching so carefully, but that script is for another of his plugins. So its entirely possible things have been missed.