7 Jun
2016
7 Jun
'16
3:39 p.m.
It also means to move the tour application in that old branches too.
2016-06-07 13:59 GMT+02:00 Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>et>:
represents.
Right now with the new strategy == “Everything needed for the
default XWiki runtime, a.k.a base/default flavor” (what we’ve been calling
XE so far but that we’ll slim down a bit, for example by removing the Blog
app and move it to contrib).
Actually in practice we would support not only the last XWiki version but
also the LTS (i.e. 7.4.x + 8.x). If we wanted to support 6.4.x we could (we
still have a stable-6.4.x branch ATM that we were supposed to remove) but
it would mean changing our support strategy to support more branches… and
it means supporting the whole platform for 6.4.x, not just one extension…
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Guillaume Delhumeau (guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com)
Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS
Committer on the XWiki.org project
On 07 Jun 2016, at 10:27, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
> On 07 Jun 2016, at 09:37, Guillaume Delhumeau <
guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
Moving Tour Application into platform makes sense to me (it becomes a
critical component and deserves a proper support).
For me, it’s really about the definition of what the XWiki github org
Now we could still decide to have some flavor in contrib and have the
tour app
included in that flavor but not in “the default XWiki runtime”. In
practice this would mean promoting this flavor instead of the base/default
flavor. The question will arise anyway when we next talk about other
flavors that we may want to have in contrib such a KB flavor, workgroup
flavor, web flavor, etc.
> However, the current
> application supports XWiki >= 6.4.1. By moving it to platform, we will
only
support
the last XWiki version.
This is a tough topic indeed. For the tour there’s the solution of keeping it
in contrib and
introducing a flavor but for CKEditor it’s harder to justify that
it’s not
part of the base flavor IMO but maybe it’s possible and we would offer only
the wiki editor in the base flavor. Of course we could modify our
functional tests fwk to support running on various versions of the
dependencies and have CI builds to ensure that an extension works with all
versions but it’s not perfect and it would mean that for the first time we
would have code in the xwiki github org that would not use the latest
APIs/latest JDK features.
The other option is Marius’s, i.e. accept that we hand-pick some
extensions from
contrib that we bundle in the base/default flavor such as
the Tour app, CKEditor integration, etc. In this case, we would just need
to redefine what “xwiki github org” means. Saying “core component” would
not be enough, it would needs a more precise definition.
Interesting topic ;)
Any other option that we have?
Thanks
-Vincent
> 2016-06-06 15:31 GMT+02:00 Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>et>:
>
>>
>>> 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:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> 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…
>>
>>> 2) Support. The XWiki runtime is supported by the XWiki Core Dev Team.
>>>> 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
>> by
>>> 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
--
Guillaume Delhumeau (guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com)
Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS
Committer on the XWiki.org project
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs