Re: [AD] Allegro generalization/extension mechanism

[Chris <chris.kcat@xxxxxxxxxx>]

guilt wrote:
> So, what do you guys feel/think/suggest about splitting up the library
> into base+implementation+extension?

I probably would leave Allegro as-is (eg. one full-featured library), 
and provide some kind of public plugin API for 3rd party add-ons. The 
Allegro devs could sanction/endorse certain plugins, but since 
they're/we're not going to maintain it, it wouldn't go good in the lib. 
And I don't see the use in splitting Allegro up, since if the Allegro 
devs are going to work on/support it, it might as well be in the lib 
itself and reduce the amount of dependancies the user has to worry about.

Things like the GUI, if work on it is going to be stopped, I can 
understand being externalized into a plug-in and letting someone else 
take it over.. but something like image loading that's going to be used 
alot and would be maintained, there's no reason to externalize.