13 Dec
2009
13 Dec
'09
2:07 p.m.
On Dec 13, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Dec 13, 2009, at 1:36 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
That won't work in the following case:
- some custom user code uses bridge.DocumentName as tries to pass it
to other core module's APIs.
Or we'd need to keep backward compat for all existing modules. That's
a lot. I've started making changes in my local workspace and that
means changes in:
- office importer
- classloader
- macro html
- macro script
- wikibridge
- url
- chart
and quite a few more.
Thanks
-Vincent
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?
hmm I guess we could add them as backward-compat aspects. Thanks
-Vincent
Thanks
-Vincent
On Dec 13, 2009, at 10:35 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
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