Re: "Unofficial" NVDA Add-Ons Repository
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
The position of the NVDA add-ons community is that we encourage add-on authors to submit add-ons for review so they can be featured on the community add-ons website. This allows new authors to be recognized for their contributions and for folks to find add-ons more easily, and eventually, allow add-on updates from official sources (for now).
In the past, the review process for add-ons was strict. This was greatly relaxed in 2016 to check for basics only, with an option for authors to request more stringent reviews on a case by case basis. I think this may have caused authors to not submit add-ons in the past, but that’s slowly changing.
There are two more reasons (more of a technical nature) that submitting add-ons for review are encouraged (and I will go around the add-ons community to help out once more):
There is a third reason why we encourage reviews: NVDA Core code compatibility. Some add-on authors, including I, have declared that due to various reasons, latest add-on releases (current and future) will require NVDA 2018.2 and later for optimal functionality, and usually add-on reviewers catch this quite early. Also, there will come a day when add-ons that declare themselves incompatible with a certain minimum version of NVDA will not be loaded by NVDA itself (unless overridden by developers). These changes are first applied to add-ons on official community add-ons repo, and then cascades to others.
From: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Behalf Of Brian Vogel
On Sun, Jun 3, 2018 at 06:25 pm, Ian Blackburn wrote:
That's not really the issue. There exist add-ons written for software that are not a part of the official add-on repository.
Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134
Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.
~ H.L. Mencken, AKA The Sage of Baltimore