7 Jun
2016
7 Jun
'16
9:37 a.m.
Moving Tour Application into platform makes sense to me (it becomes a
critical component and deserves a proper support). However, the current
application supports XWiki >= 6.4.1. By moving it to platform, we will only
support the last XWiki version.
2016-06-06 15:31 GMT+02:00 Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>et>:
> 1) I like that the XWiki runtime is all released at once with all
> extensions making it using the same versions and verified to work together.
XWiki runtime has lots of third party dependencies. Bootstrap, Solr,
jQuery, just to name a few. I don't see how having the source code in our
repo (platform) makes a difference at runtime when the
integration/functional tests verify they work together.
Because they don’t! :) Just check any extension in contrib and you’ll see
their func test (when they have some!) don’t test that they work with the
latest version of XWiki…
--
Guillaume Delhumeau (guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com)
Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS
Committer on the XWiki.org project
On 06 Jun 2016, at 15:24, Marius Dumitru Florea
<
mariusdumitru.florea(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:58 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
>
>> On 06 Jun 2016, at 14:50, Marius Dumitru Florea <
> mariusdumitru.florea(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Alexandru Cotiuga <
>> alexandru.cotiuga(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> As it was decided already, a Homepage Tour have to be implemented.
> However,
>>> no option regarding the place where the Tour Application should be
> added as
>>> dependency was discussed.
>>>
>>> There are some possible options:
>>> 1) XWiki Enterprise
>>> 2) XWiki Platform Distribution
>>> 3) XWiki Platform Helper
>>>
>>> 4) Is there any option to have the Tour Application as a part of the
> Core ?
>>>
>>> What would be the best way to include the Contrib applications in
XWiki?
>>>
>>
>> On this topic (sorry if I hijack your thread) I was wondering why don't
> we
>> have dependencies from platform/enterprise to contrib. We have lots of
>> third party dependencies, contrib could be considered as such.
Moreover,
>> we're in the process of moving
non-core (vertical) extensions out of
>> platform to contrib. It would be a pity to move something from contrib
to
>> platform and then back to contrib. I have
the same issue with the
> CKEditor
>> Integration extension. We want CKEditor as the default editor, bundled
> with
>> the default distribution, but do we need to move it to platform? Same
for
the Welcome Tour.
I’d personally not like this for the following reasons:
2) Support. The XWiki runtime is supported by the
XWiki Core Dev Team.
by
Extensions in contrib are not supported by the
XWiki Core Dev Team.
So the FAQ application you moved out of platform is no longer supported the XWiki Core Dev Team?
Correct.
The extension page
http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/FAQ+Application
doesn't reflect this.
I added my name to the list as a supporter. I’ve kept “XWiki Dev Team”
because it's a past authors and it wouldn’t make sense to remove it. But
yes it’s no longer officially supported by the XWiki Core Dev Team.
Note that e.x.o doesn’t say who maintains a given extension, it just says
who participated to developing it ;) We’re currently missing the info on
whether the extension is actively supported and by whom. FTR Confluence
does this with a “supported” label that you can hover over and provides
info. For example:
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/plugins/nl.avisi.confluence.plugins.numbe…
Thanks
-Vincent
In addition xwiki-contrib is very open and anyone
can make modifications
> there and quality is thus harder to guarantee.
>
> We defined the xwiki github organization as containing horizontal
modules,
> ie modules that can be required for any
flavor and both CKEditor and the
> Tour Application fit the need. By opposition to vertical modules which
make
> sense only for some use cases (like the
Meeting Manager app) and not by
> default in XE. We have the option of having flavors in contrib for
those if
> we want though. For CKEditor it’s not a good
thing since we’d like it by
> default.
>
> One alternative (which I’m not fond of at all) would be to have ckeditor
> as a separate git repo in the xwiki github organization.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>> Thanks,
>> Marius
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Alex
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs