Reviving http://markmail.org/message/hlnqke3igkbec332 for as an official vote.
We have waited way too long and I think we really need to find a
solution even if none of the committers use Windows since a long time.
Every time a Windows dev even think of contributing he is very quickly
discouraged...
As a reminder the issue is that working on XWiki source code is a pain
for MS Windows developers because of the (impossible to understand I
agree) limitation on path size.
So the idea is to find a new logical rule to drastically shorten our
paths and Sergiu proposed the following: remove duplicated information
from our paths to maven modules.
Here is an example:
xwiki-platform-core/xwiki-platform-rendering/xwiki-platform-rendering-transformations/xwiki-platform-rendering-transformation-macro
(131 chars)
would become
core/rendering/transformations/macro (36 chars)
So WDYT ?
Here is my +1
I also find it nicer when navigating using cd and tab in a unix shell anyway.
Planning to do it in 5.1 if everyone agree.
--
Thomas Mortagne
Hi devs,
Today let’s try to do a Code Coverage Day. It’s our first one and I didn’t get the time to prepare it so I propose something simple:
- The goal is to increase the jacoco TPC threshold in pom.xml files
- Everyone notes down the TPC increase they’ve brought to a module so that when we prepare the day’s report we can add them there
Reminder: to check the current TPC, run “mvn clean install -Pquality -Dxwiki.jacoco.instructionRatio=1.00”
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
Hi,
I'm working on XAForum application and I have to release 1.1 version.
Can someone create an account on nexus.xwiki.org for me please ?
Thanks in advance.
Sofiane Baloul
Hi Marius,
I added some params like autostart and repeat to your macro-jwplayer, if you
like I would add this to the project and document it.
My github-id is jhaimerl.
Regards,
Josef
--
View this message in context: http://xwiki.475771.n2.nabble.com/Access-for-macro-jwplayer-on-github-tp758…
Sent from the XWiki- Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi devs,
While building the new signed script solution with Thomas, we have the need
to create a new kind of entity references for macros. This will allow us to
keep reference to signed macros.
Those references will have entityReference as parent, since macros may be
contained in document, but also in object properties. Currently we do not
need a syntax for those references, since these will only exists as
objects. So, no string serializer is planned.
So, we need to agree on creating macroReference that will have at this
point a unique identifier (to be discussed later) and a parent that could
be either a documentReference or an objectPropertyReference.
Here is my +1,
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO
Hi,
I'd like to propose inclusion of an exciting new Realtime Collaborative Editor
backend algorithm in xwiki-contrib. The Algorithm which we are calling ChainPad
is based on the Nakamoto BlockChain of Bitcoin fame and uniquely exists entirely
on the client side, without the server having any knowlege of the document
content. This means collaborative textareas, WYSIWYG editors and even
collaborative drawing/whiteboarding could be possible without any modification
to the server side code. It could potentially even run entirely peer-to-peer,
although this avenue has not been explored.
The code as it stands today is in: https://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdrt
but I'd like to move it to xwiki-contrib/chainpad.
WDYT?
Caleb
I am working on a Contacts application that will allow people to keep contact
information on
* Companies
* Departments
* People
These can contain multiple:
* Addresses
* E-mail Addresses
* Phone Numbers.
First question: Is there already a ID field on each instance of an object?
If not, I will want to generate one. If I do that, can I hide this ID field
from the search engine?
Second question: If I do a traditional many-to-many relationship where you
would have a middle document that connects the many on both sides, (see
document below)
<http://xwiki.475771.n2.nabble.com/file/n7589555/many-to-many.png> Is it
possible to query this type of relationship?
--
View this message in context: http://xwiki.475771.n2.nabble.com/Hide-a-field-or-Unique-ID-tp7589555.html
Sent from the XWiki- Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.