Database of extensions format

[dacap]

We should have a file format for the database of extensions. Could we just the package.json of each extension? Probably we need some extra information (purchase/download link, checksum).

Some points we need/want:

1. Modifications (new extensions/new versions/deleted extensions) in the registry must be done through PRs
2. Extensions might be downloaded directly (if a link is provided) or a link to purchase it (e.g. itch)
3. We should have a checksum to check that the extension is the same that the registered one (probably only useful if the extension can be downloaded directly)

It would be nice to be able to register a simple script from its GitHub repository: The README can has some information about the extension, there could be a .lua script, and the GitHub repo SHA can act as a checksum for the specific published version.

I think the easier path to achieve access this registry of extensions is:

1. Create a fetch()-like method to send HTTPS requests from Lua scripts
2. Create a minimal "Aseprite Extensions" extension to access this DB
3. Add the same "Aseprite Extensions" in this DB (so we can update it from here)
4. Register the first third-party extension
5. Call for other authors to register their own extensions here

[projectitis]

I would support adding a package.json (or similar) in the correct format to each script/extension repo. Then registering the script just by supplying the github link.

Would be great to be able to search for and install scripts/extensions directly from within Aseprite :)

[fabi-co]

Sounds nice !

Agreed that the package.json could be used to contain all the information by adding the extra fields mentioned. I'd add some other optional information ideas :

• Tags : would be useful for filtering scripts and extensions
• Features : A simple listing of features might be useful in complement to the already existing description.
• Changelog

Simple scripts could also have their package.json (or equivalent, just changing the name?), it might be easier than digging information in Readme.

+1 for registering from github repo and its SHA for checksum.

[projectitis]

Simple scripts could contain a docblock of some sort at the start with the same info as package.json?

For example, if it should be json to make parsing consistent:

--[[
{
    "name": "my script",
    "version": "0.1",
    "author": "Projectitis"
}
]]--

-- Rest of script

Or without json:

--[[
name: my script
version: 0.1
author: Projectitis
}
]]--

-- Rest of script