14 Dec
2009
14 Dec
'09
12:23 p.m.
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 11:45, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Dec 14, 2009, at 10:57 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
- AttachmentNameSerializer
- AttachmentNameFactory
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 09:19, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
ok I've checked more precisely what were the APIs that are broken and
for which we could want to maintain backward compat (I have not listed
internal implementation classes):
1) xwiki-bridge:
- DocumentAccesssBridge
- DocumentModelBridge
- DocumentNameFactory
- DocumentNameSerializer
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).
2) xwiki-core:
- XWikiDocument (for getDocumentName())
3) xwiki-openoffice:
- XDOMOfficeDocumentBuilder
- XHTMLOfficeDocumentBuilder
- TargetPageDescriptor
- XDOMOfficeDocumentSplitter
4) xwiki-macro-wikibridge
- WikiMacroManager
- WikiMacroFactory
5) xwiki-url
- XWikiAttachmentURL
- XWikiDocumentURL
So here's what I propose:
- We keep backward compat for 1) and 2)
+1 for backward compatibility here, not sure we need aspects here
since it basically mean put almost the whole module in aspects
- We don't keep backward compat for 4) (I doubt
it's used by anyone
else and the backward compat has already been broken for that module a
week ago) and for 5) (it's not used yet)
+0.5 for no backward compatibility here
- I'm hesitating for 3). We could keep backward
compat to make it
easier for some projects. Thus I'm slighty in favor of keeping
backward compat for it.
Not sure either. I would be more in favor of keeping backward
compatibility as a general good rule when possible.
- We use aspects whenever we want to keep backward
compat
- We need a new method name in DocumentModelBridge to add in addition
of getCurrentDocumentName(). I don't have a good idea:
getDocumentName2(), getNewDocumentName(), getDocumentNameModel(),
getDocumentNameFromModel(), etc. Any idea?
getModelDocumentName() ?
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
--
Thomas Mortagne
>> 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
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs