Open edX is moving towards an architecture where the edx-platform core is extended primarily through plugins and independently deployed apps, rather than code that gets merged into the edx-platform repo. At OpenCraft, we have updated our development process accordingly, setting guidelines for when and how we expect to create features as plugins vs. when we want to contribute them to the core platform.
We have some great plugins in the development pipeline, and I expect that we are going to see a lot of new platform plugins of all types and sizes developed by the community in the coming years (like Figures). One concern is that if these plugins aren’t part of the core, people might not know about them or might duplicate work.
So, what do people think about creating a nice Open edX plugin directory, that can list all the XBlocks, feature plugins, independent apps, themes, etc. for Open edX? Ideally with each entry tagged by named release, and with info pulled automatically from GitHub so that it’s always up to date and developers can update their own listings.
That sounds incredibly useful. I’d also like to see a category for tools that can be deployed by course teams rather than by the person who controls the Open edX instance.
I really like this idea - there’s been standalone sites previously that have fallen by the wayside. I’d love to see something like this, perhaps even maintained centrally as part of https://open.edx.org/ to make these community extensions a clear part of the benefits of using Open edX. Though how to do that in a way that means we don’t end up with way too much process and manual work to make it worthwhile is the question. Having it on the wiki means it’s easily editable, but I really think it’s a good way to sort of say “Look at all the cool plugins and extensions our community has built for this” to people considering Open edX, and they won’t have wiki access.
Can you / someone clarify what licence (if any) extensions developed using plugins/IDSs falls under? The core platform is AGPL, and XBlocks Apache. Do either of these apply in the scenario as you understand it?
@Rick It’s up to the author of each plugin to determine the license which they want to use, but since the platform is AGPL my understanding of this would mean that plugins to the platform must be GPL-compatible (so not proprietary). For IDAs or anything that communicates exclusively using REST APIs, you can use any license you wish.
Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer and this is just my understanding, not any official position; I could be wrong.
I think my take on this is in line with what you say - if you are using via an API then you have a free choice. However like you I’m not, nor ever want to be a lawyer
If you have any comments on the actual extension options, API docs etc then be happy to get them on that thread.
