Re: [xwiki-devs] Location, release cycle and distribution of non core macros 2.0

On Nov 25, 2008, at 10:43 AM, Jerome Velociter wrote: > Thomas Mortagne wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:50 PM, Jerome Velociter >> <jerome(a)xwiki.com> wrote: >>> Hello devs, >>> >>> This week we created a new "xwiki-macros" module under platform/ >>> core/ >>> for macros of the XWiki Syntax 2.0. Another question now is what >>> do we >>> do for macros that are not "core macros" (i.e. not indispensable >>> for >>> what we consider being the basic working wiki, unlike the TOC >>> macro, or >>> the velocity macro). Development of such macros already started, >>> for >>> example the instant messenger status macro, and the map macro. >>> >>> Possibilities I see : >>> >>> 1. having them at the same level we have applications/ plugins/ >>> under >>> platform : adding a macros/ directory. >>> 2. having them in the xwiki-macros core submodule, despite the >>> fact they >>> are not core >>> >>> I am for solution 1 right now, but maybe there are better >>> alternatives >>> to this, too. >>> >>> We also have to decide how we do release and distribute them, >>> for >>> example do we pack them with XE, or do we release them >>> separately, >>> and >>> let users install them themselves as it is the case for most of >>> the >>> applications already. (For me the answer to this latest question >>> seems >>> obvious : we _should_ send them together with XE) >>> >>> Let me know what you think, I'd like if still possible having >>> the >>> map >>> macro in 1.7 RC1. >> >> +1 for 2. especially if we plan to distribute them with XE. >> Anyway >> having them in core/xwiki-macros does not means it is >> automatically >> in >> the "basic working wiki" and all the macros we officially support >> should be in the same place IMO. > > I gave it more thoughts, and I think I agree with Thomas. I think > it's > better to have the macros we plan to officially support in one > place. > Plus, if we bundle them by default with XE, having them in core > together > with the other macros would prevent us of having to state the > dependency > explicitly at XE level, as we have to do for plugins that are in > platform/plugins/ for example. I'm not sure if this is right. It might be ok for now since we don't have a lot. But very soon we'll have some macro that are not ready to be released or that are a bit "exotic" (I'm not sure for the map macro) or that have a different release cycle (it's a pain to have to wait 3 months to release a macro that is ready for consumption for ex). For me this is exactly similar to plugins. We don't release them all when we do a XE release.