14 Dec
2009
14 Dec
'09
10:57 a.m.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 09:19, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Dec 13, 2009, at 1:36 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
I really don't like breaking API if it's not absolutely necessary and
temporary or not bridge is public API, temporary does not mean
suddenly vanish for no reason... I don't see why adding the new model
would have to break the bridge, that's two different things for me and
bridge should not be broken if there is not technical issue to keep it
working. For things other than the bridge it's ok for me since it's
more SPIs than APIs and i doubt anyone except us (or even any of our
plugins) are using it.
For example there is not reason to delete
org.xwiki.bridge.AttachmentNameSerializer,
org.xwiki.bridge.AttachmentNameFactory,
org.xwiki.bridge.DocumentNameFactory,
org.xwiki.bridge.DocumentNameFactory, ... And we just need to double
methods in DocumentAccessBridge dealing with DocumentName to add
methods using the new model.DocumentName if we need some.
+1 for the new model but -1 to break anything in the bridge public API
since it's very easy to not break it.
Before voting please consider that this will
break a lot of existing
code which is currently using org.xwiki.bridge.DocumentName (since
it would now be named org.xwiki.model.DocumentName).
Do we want to keep org.xwiki.bridge.DocumentName (and all the others
too) and deprecate them?
IMO it depends if we agree that 2.2 will introduce the new model or
not.
WDYT?
Note that I have now finished the refactoring locally and I'm waiting
for a decision. FYI there are 93 files impacted but most are tests or
files which don't expose APIs. In term of APIs there are probably
something like 20 methods whose signature have changed (mostly from
org.xwiki.bridge.DocumentName to org.xwiki.model.DocumentName).
For developers it means replace "bridge" by "model" in imports. This
is not a big change but it means they need to re-release whatever
"extensions" they have done (if they used the bridge) when they move
to XE 2.2.
Personally I don't see any way of moving forward for the new model
without breaking some backward compat and the bridge was always
flagged as being temporary so I'm +1 to go ahead. I'd also like to
continue working on the model in the 2.2 timeframe to ensure that what
we release for 2.2 final will be stable (for example by introducing
the WikiResourceName discussed in the other mail thread on the new
model).
Thanks
-Vincent
--
Thomas Mortagne
On Dec 13, 2009, at 10:35 AM, Vincent Massol
wrote:
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Hi,
New proposal:
Create a new xwiki-model and move "clean" classes from xwiki-bridge
into it. These are:
- *AttachmentName*
- *DocumentName*
Here's my +1
Thanks
-Vincent
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 18:00, Vincent Massol<vincent(a)massol.net>
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Since we have some final classes (final in the sense with a good
>> architecture) in xwiki-bridge I'd like to rename it into xwiki-
>> model
>> so that we can start this model module.
>>
>> Note: We'd still have a org.xwiki.model.bridge package for the time
>> being in that xwiki-model module.
>>
>> Here's my +1
>
> I would prefer to create a new xwiki-model with only the clean apis
> instead of having clean and bridge in the same project.
>
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent