Well, now it does seem you read something. Thanks.
I'll do my best to explain it with the latest ways to say it (probably where others quit)
I'll try to stop using parentheses, though and clarify later so you don't get lost.
But in what way are they wrong?
They are not wrong. The page is the landing page from Google and before discouraging people to commit their plugin some note/link/call-out needs to be placed.
Parentheses:
1) Plugin API was designed, independently of what you thought you are programming it for, for more people to be able to develop Plugins -point 2 applies here too- without being a Programmer like you. It works, and people like me, probably the biggest group, are doing it without being a programmer.
2) Developing a plugin and committing it is part of the same thing.
3) You (programmers) are wrong expecting "we have to be this tall to use svn".
What's that called? - Making others win their wings to access what you got with sweat- envy? bragging?. I don't know. I just know it's big enough to make so difficult to see the bottleneck the submission is, when the 'authorized' way to use SVN is that.
You seem to be confusing "files" and "icons" and "finder" and throwing these around randomly in ways that I don't understand and which, after several reads, make little sense.
You seem to have never used a Mac or a PC with windows.
Don't you really know what Finder is?
Finder.App?
Apple OS's file manager?
-I was reluctant to call them "file managers" because people know them by "Finder" or "Window's Desktop or Explorer".-
Most people out here use Graphical file managers SVN GUIs run on.
Those GFM allow you to work with the files you have under SVN anyway, causing most of issues for us -my big group, not you.
That's what the note you removed from the codex -far from the page people lands on- said.
For us, GFM is a great way to work. You can probably glide through code and files in a command-line terminal, not us.
Not having that explained in the same page or very close to it, is to deny us a chance to do it quicker.
A product this quality, this open, this popular, designed to be easy-to-use, WordPress and Plugins API, with instructions that nerdy… Those instructions could easily be on SVN book website and WordPress having its own for-the-people page, at the same level than the rest of the project.
Such a Plugin API for-everyone with such SVN instructions sounds like "ok, we are forced to allow you all to play with the dough, but only italian-pizza-masters like us can bake it. Disgusting.
If you write a plugin, then sir, you are a programmer. And yes, the codex and associated documentation is written for programmers.
I'm a developer. I write plugins and small projects that take me weeks. I'm not a programmer, and I YET have ignored your instructions. I can work with my files the way I use to, and my files commit fine.
Are you wrong in the above quote or I don't exist?
It's time for you to separate both terms 'programmer' and 'developer'.
You might have programmed the API for programmers like you, but whoever came up with the "WordPress" concept (the whole thing, not just programming) had the idea of the API so people like me can grasp it. I wouldn't be a developer beyond html and css without the WP API. Some day I might be a programmer, but there's a big difference between developer and programmer.
Also, it's time to stop saying "what this is", instead of reflecting up about "what it should be".
I got your point, and what you though those instructions were made for.
Today it's wrong. It's not at WP level.
And that's the problem here. It used to happen to me when I had others deciding my projects. I used to get blinded on "what the project is" and not in "what the project is meant to be", because looking at it from the director's perspective my hard work seemed "not there yet". And it's the director's vision what is making my work that public and famous, not my work directly.
We are so proud of 'what we did', that we can't see 'what it should be'.
We don't really need to be documenting basic PHP and code practices. We don't need to be overly documenting how files work, or how to use SVN.
Really? Don't you want to ask whoever decided an APi would be a great idea? Are you sure you are talking on behalf of most people?
You're right. F_ _k them!. Let's get rid of the API and let programmers use PHP. They certainly can. See anything wrong there?
Who is "we"?
WordPress is a project for me. You are the developer. Regardless of it being free or not, I'm the user. Any project is made for the biggest group, so far me the target user, and yet I haven't gotten further than you on this topic. You, a programmer the size not many exist… I haven't had the opinion of real users. Your opinion as part of the small group of admins is compromised by interests, and your group is smaller than mine. Otherwise, there wouldn't be a need for an API, people would be learning farming instead of web development… -web dev is growing in size and skills-set, stats which makes WP to grow-
… so when you say "we"… you should remember there are a lot of info in the codex you shouldn't allowing in there based in the same single-owner-excuse, but it's fine because this project is ours and it was us who published that content. It couldn't be too wrong if we pur it ourselves there. I'm sure there are hundreds or more prople checking those changes, and it wonders me it only affects you.
I think you are totally wrong or have personal interest to keep that page the way it is, so in order for me to gather others opinion to prove you or myself wrong, what do you think is the best approach for me to get to them in this forum without a-few-programmers blocking me at the door?
I'm sure you want the best for the project and ensure it's available for more and a wider range of skilled people -regardless of the etymology of programmer and developer- even if that awakens you of where WP goes seen from the outside.
