On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
+1 in general.
On 16 Jun 2016, at 10:57, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 10:43 AM, Eduard Moraru <enygma2002(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> +1
>
> Also, if we retire the jira project, it means that we stop the support
for
> this application (since no new issues can be
created), effectively
retiring
> the whole application itself, not only its
jira project.
>
> I`m not sure if we currently have a documented process for retiring
contrib
> extensions, but we should at least update the
descriptions (and maybe
title
> as well - marking it [Retired]) on the e.x.o.
page and on the contrib
repo
> to clearly mention that the app is no longer
actively supported by
anyone.
We don't have any process. We actually never done it before. What we
could easily do is add a property in ExtensionClass to indicate an
extension is retired in which case:
* the extension does not appear in EM anymore (i.e. make the extension
"invalid") since that's something we want for this kind of extension I
think
* the extension sheet make clear it's retired with some visible marker
in the title and some warning at the beginning of the content
Or simply remove the extension from e.x.o. I don’t think they should even
be visible on e.x.o since they’ll be visible when someone filters or
searches for extensions and will potentially confuse the user (even with
the banner/warnings).
If we want to keep it visible I’d not mix them
with other extensions in
the LT but instead I'd introduce another page for retired extensions and
we’d add a link to retired extensions on e.x.o home page somewher.
I would keep it on e.x.o for documentation. There may be users that are
forced to use this application. Note that this application is in a similar
situation to the Radeox macros that Thomas wanted to remove from e.x.o .
Check the "Remove old Radeox macros from e.x.o?" thread.
I agree that it shouldn't appear on EM and on the e.x.o live table.