WorldScript plugin ecosystem — curated extensions, permissions and marketplace trust

[qnbs]

Why this exists

Issue #348 defines a security-conscious plugin marketplace and trusted install/update model. This Discussion explores the ecosystem users may want without weakening #348's security admission model.

Current state

Authors may want extensions, tool packs, templates, import/export helpers, and specialized workflows. The open question is how to provide useful extensibility across the PWA and native products while keeping permissions, integrity, updates, revocation, and data ownership explicit.

Product decision space

Explore a curated registry versus a community marketplace, local/developer plugins, declarative extensions and tool packs before arbitrary code, permission scopes, update and revocation behavior, provenance, and portability. Any marketplace proposal must preserve #348's integrity, sandbox, permission, and admission requirements.

Role perspectives

Role-perspective note: The viewpoints below are maintainer-curated, AI-assisted design lenses. They are not separate community members, votes, or evidence of consensus.

• 🧩 Plugin developer: useful extension points, local development, packaging, versioning, and honest capability contracts.
• ✍️ Nontechnical author: discoverability, safe defaults, understandable permissions, and reversible installation.
• 🔐 Security: least privilege, integrity, sandboxing, supply-chain trust, updates, and revocation.
• 🖥️ PWA/native portability: one capability model that behaves predictably across browser and desktop targets.
• 🧭 Maintainer/ecosystem governance: sustainable curation, compatibility policy, ownership, and abuse response.

Questions for the community

• Which author problems justify plugins first?
• Should the first ecosystem layer be declarative extensions or tool packs rather than arbitrary code?
• What should a user see before granting a permission?
• How should local/developer plugins differ from curated marketplace entries?
• What update, rollback, revocation, and ownership expectations are essential?

Relationship to implementation

This Discussion is exploratory only. #348 remains the implementation and acceptance authority, and no Discussion response changes its security gates, priority, roadmap admission, acceptance criteria, or execution sequencing.