I don’t get it either, of course a plugin that has been accepted in official store let us know there was scrutiny but that’s gone after the next update. AFAIK plugins don’t get reassessed at random or by number of downloads, etc, neither there’s warranty that what I’m seeing on the public repo (if so) matches what’s installed from the store.
a comment system is a part of what I’m expecting but technical commentary should be available somehow too. what if a plugin works well for the user but it’s too risky or suspicious from an experienced developer perspective.
I guess with BRAT and checking the Obsidian pull requests but it implies another point of inconvenience and extra work to make it happen.
Unfortunately.
There should be some kind of prioritization based on community feedback, some form of voting and how devoted to plugin maintenance the author is (based on previous plugins and their performance in addressing issues).
Interesting suggestions, a list of other plugins by the same author would have helped tremendously at the beginning of my plugin exploration process.
Claude used doesn’t mean by itself that it was vibe coded, does it?
Broken plugins that are no longer maintained get removed at some point?
Good recommendation.
Finally, core Obsidian is nice but the community and their plugins is what makes it usable and really useful for me. The revision process correctly improved would make me look forward to using this long-term because of how well it adapts to some of my very specific requirements.