On 9/5/07, Catalin Hritcu <catalin.hritcu@gmail.com > wrote:

+1 for Ludovic committing his change.

Catalin

On 9/5/07, Vincent Massol < vincent@massol.net> wrote:
>
> On Sep 5, 2007, at 11:16 AM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
>
> > Vincent Massol a écrit :
> >> Hi Ludovic,
> >>
> >> On Sep 5, 2007, at 1:44 AM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to propose to vote to add this new feature in 1.1RC2
> >>> http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-1671
> >>>
> >>> I know we should not add features, but this one would allow to
> >>> run groovy script requiring libs not included in the xwiki release.
> >>> For example this could allow to package the Google Docs Summer of
> >>> Code project as a pure extension without configuration and even
> >>> restart.
> >>>
> >>> It's implementatin is very safe, as nothing changes unless you
> >>> add a param or a value in the context.
> >>> < http://fisheye2.cenqua.com/browse/xwiki/xwiki-platform/xwiki-
> >>> applications/branches>
> >>
> >> I told you on chat that I was ok with this. However I'm having
> >> second doubts... Sorry :)
> >>
> >> I'd like to know more why we need to do this now. Why not commit
> >> it on trunk? It'll be in 1.2M1 in 2/3 weeks. Radu's plugin will
> >> not be integrated/cleaned up/etc before that time anyway and even
> >> then it would still work with 1.1 users, it's only a matter of
> >> installation.
> >>
> >> I don't think we should rush this. It's not so much a question of
> >> taking risks or not that doing a precedent. If we do this now,
> >> then we're breaking our RC rule and it'll happen again in the
> >> future (I think we could potentially remove betas and RCs in the
> >> future when we have 70% or more covered by automated tests but
> >> we're not there yet.
> >>
> >> So, unless there's a good reason I haven't seen, I'd rather not
> >> commit this right now on the 1.1 branch.
> >>
> >> WDYT?
> >>
> > The actual modification to xwiki core code is 2 lines just to allow
> > to add a class loader (without specifying a class loader the
> > behavior is the same).
> > Then there are a class loader (new class) and a new API to run the
> > groovy script under that class loader. They do not impact existing
> > API.
> >
> > The same code written in script is much harder (code written
> > currently in xwiki code needs to be duplicated in groovy).
> >
> > Having this simple additional API in the code will allow 1.1
> > installations (which are going to be our stable version for a
> > while), to be more extensible by scripting, thus allowing us to
> > demonstrate new features (like GDocs integration for example).
> > If we postpone that non risky change to 1.2 then we will have this
> > feature in many many installations (our farm, our clients, in
> > chrono, in nearbee) no earlier then beginning 2008.. since client
> > would need to upgrade to 1.2..
>
> Some valid points. I still think it shouldn't be committed but I'm ok
> we commit it since you think it's really required in 1.1.
>
> Ok everyone?
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> devs@xwiki.org
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs@xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs