14 May
2018
14 May
'18
10:04 a.m.
Hi,
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 7:21 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
I'm sorry, but I personally don not agree with this point of view at all.
This may be the way the Mail API works, with a template page that is meant
to be customized to be able to make up the content of the email. However,
when an application chooses to use the mail API, it is forced to use the
same mechanism, but that does not also come with the obligation for the
resulting email to be customized by the user, just because it's relatively
easy for the user to do so, through a relatively well known mechanism. IMO,
our target with the "disallow editing" effort is to identify pages that
contain code (including code and content) that are part of an
application/extension and make sure users don't start simply editing them,
for whatever customization reason they or we may come up with. These
particular 2 mail templates do contain a lot of code and are subject to
improvement. The fact that both are document is probably a consequence of
Notifications trying to offer the same level of features/doc as the
previous watchlist feature.
I am still advocating for the copy and customize approach, as we need to
clearly identify what is standard and what is the user's customization and
we need to limit as much as possible the number of automatic merges
(possible point of failure) that are to be done during an upgrade. If we
want to make the Notifications email customizable, we should add a
configuration option of the Notifications feature that allows an admin to
provide a custom email template. IMO, that is the clear and clean solution
that we should strive for.
As an exercise, Try to visualize the likelihood of a customized
Notifications (i.e. still under development) email template surviving for
3-5 years later on, specially if we go it the previously suggested approach
of not overriding or merging at all, because the user customized it.
Thanks,
Eduard
“user”? (as in “it’s a user page”)
“editable”? (as in “it’s an extension page supposed to be editable by
users)
But first let’s agree about the type/need.
Thanks
-Vincent
to
--
Thomas Mortagne
On 11 May 2018, at 14:22, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
wrote:
On Fri, May 11, 2018 at 11:00 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
> Hi Edy,
>
>> On 8 May 2018, at 12:38, Eduard Moraru <enygma2002(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> IMO, it's just like any other page: it depends on the application it is
>> part of and we can't treat them all the same.
>>
>> XWiki.ResetPasswordMailContent should be "default". I see no
particular
>> reason to customize the reset password email, as it is a standard
feature
>> and it must be synchronized with the code
that is calling the template
>> (i.e. any variable bindings define a sort of API that the caller uses.
>> Changing the content also risks breaking that contract, since the
caller
>> could be updated while a customized
version of this template will
not.).
>> The only case I could imagine where the
reset password email might be
>> customized would be when there exists no translation for a particular
>> language and an admin might want to translate it on the fly, however,
we
>> could treat this as a limitation of the
current version and improve it
in
>> future versions, just like any other code
feature.
>
> For me anything visual (themes, skins and thus email templates) are
things
that only should be able to be changed but that users will change
for sure (and we”ve seen changes for all of them in the history of XWiki).
"anything visual" contains much more than themes, skins and email
templates.
>
> And yes the bindings we allow using in them are “API contracts” that we
shouldn’t break at all. They’re exactly like scripting APIs.
>
>> Share by email probably also has an email template which should be
>> "default" as well, since the only customization it is designed to
support
>> is the actual message included by the
user and that is already separate
>> from the template.
>>
>> Other examples? (Notifications probably has its own mechanism for
>> displaying certain notifications or what notifications to send by
email)
>
> Sure, it’s even documented:
> http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/
Notifications%20Application/#HCustomizingthenotificationemailtemplate
>
> Same for watchlist:
> http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/
Watchlist%20Application#HAdministrators:CustomizingtheWatchListemailte
mplate
IMO those documentations don't really make those templates
specifically designed to be customized, it's just "if you really need
to customize them that's the only way”.
No, they’re meant to be customized and modified.
>
> Any template contains UI and as such users will want to change them.
That’s
100% guaranteed. I’m not saying that they’ll all change them but
some will. They’ll change the wording, they’ll add some custom logo/banner,
they’ll make some modifications, adding some links, etc.
>
> Now between “default” and “demo” I don’t know.
>
> There are 2 aspects:
> * Aspect 1: If the user makes changes we should keep them for sure. If
we also
make changes at the same time, I guess the best is to try to merge
them, unless we think it’s going to break most of the time but that’s
probably not the case.
> * Aspect 2: These pages are meant to be
modified by the user so when
the user edits they shouldn’t get a warning message.
I don't think "maybe the user will need to modify this document for
some reason" is the right criteria, IMO it should be
dangerous=warning. For me there is a big difference between "this page
is meant to be modified" and "this page is the only way to modify how
the email looks”.
Users should not get a warning for them since they’re supposed to be
edited to customize the email templates.
I disagree with dangerous = warning because if you read the warning
message, it says that the page shouldn’t be edited because it belongs to an
extension. Oviousldy this message doesn’t apply here. Unless you’re talking
about another warning message specific to this type?
Do we have a type to represent those 2 aspects?
;)
We can have any type we want, just need a name. You seems to be asking
for a type with allowed edit and the rest being the default behavior.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Eduard
>>
>> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 7:26 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 18:18, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 5:02 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7 May 2018, at 16:48, Thomas Mortagne <
thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
>>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, May 7, 2018 at 4:33 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It seems we forgot to handle mail template pages. For
example
>>> XWiki.ResetPasswordMailContent
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We need to decide the type: demo, default, etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> WDYT about demo (i.e. as soon as the user starts modifying
it, we
>>> don’t upgrade it anymore)?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -Vincent
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All types with allowed edit prevent upgrade.
>>>>>
>>>>> I’m not sure we need more than 1 such type. See other mail thread.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think a more important question is: is it OK to delete it ?
>>>>>
>>>>> We could. See below
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems to me delete is not OK in this context. Unless it's
possible >>>>>> change the mail template
used for password reset ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Re delete, I think there’s another thread discussing it, no? I don’t
>>> remember the discussion too well and don’t master all the details but
AFAIR
>>> my preference was to not prevent
deletion in general (I’m worried
about
>>> unplanned use cases requiring a
delete, like renaming the page to
another
>>> place to save it, and then import
some XAR containing the new mail
>>> template).
>>>>>
>>>>> IMO all pages should be deletable without endangering the system. In
>>> this case we could imagine:
>>>>> * if the template is missing then the password reset page would
mention
>>> it with the ability to create a
default mail template
>>>>> * and/or report a mail error in the admin UI when sending the email
>>> (since the template doesn’t exist). This means that the template
factory
>>> for emails should check the existence
of the page. This should be
handled
>>> here:
https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/blob/
>>> 6e281a093d3751666fdcd3fb3a69cb638cca9b59/xwiki-platform-
>>> core/xwiki-platform-mail/xwiki-platform-mail-send/
>>> xwiki-platform-mail-send-default/src/main/java/org/
>>> xwiki/mail/internal/factory/template/DefaultMailTemplateManager.
java#L143
>>> AFAICS it will currently report a
NPE….
>>>>
>>>> As you said, deleting that page would break reset password feature
and
>>>> since I don't plan to rewrite
it right now it means delete should be
>>>> protected IMO. If someone improve this feature later then the type
can
>>>> be changed to "demo".
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Have we decided what we do about deletes in general?
>>>>
>>>> There hasn't been such discussion.
>>>
>>> I’m referring to http://markmail.org/message/kjtyzvjp5zzh4gyf (and
I’m
>>> sure I saw another discussion about
that but cannot find it ATM).
>>>
>>> I still don’t understand why we’re mixing upgradability with
deletability
>>> (and trying to find names that
represent both). Aren’t they 2
different
>>> topics?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Vincent
>>>
>>>> I don't even understand what this
>>>> mean, it's obvious to me that deleting some pages don't break
anything
>> while for others you are going to create a
huge mess.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> -Vincent
>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thomas Mortagne
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thomas Mortagne
>
>