documentation and API are always heavily agreed and welcome - sure.
Personally spoken, “Trial and Error ” mostly sucks.
But there isn’t a better feeling figuring out something you fought for days. Hooray - it’s like being the of the .
Whatsoever! Another point to think about could be a (mainly) closed Slack discussion between manufacturer and plugin writers. Closed just because I think into another direction:
A plugin can be powerful. It can heavily extend PG and it could be even part of PG default. So on the one hand, a remote person is working on a task which is on developers plan anyway - so twice the work.
An example could be CSS-Grid. Recently, I tried to add a very basic version to my Reginald-Framework. Meanwhile @matjaz wrote a version thousands time better which is now part of to the APP core. Certainly a much better one - the greatest in market at the day of writing - just for the protocol, and thanks to @matjaz for wrapping its use with those nice video-screencasts.
Another thing could be the
<picture> element I recently picked up (after years) once again as responsive images concept. It’s not part of the library so far. A basic version of it could be part of my framework as well. But it could be even part of the default lib - so twice the work again … or?
That’s why I tend not discussing all and everything on a public platform - keeping some smaller things kinda hidden. And who knows? Some of those discussion members even help building this API - or documentation or whatever job that needs to be done there (such as translating stuff or whatever).
Just a cent or two from my side.