7 Jul
2017
7 Jul
'17
12:22 p.m.
On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 12:16, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
I really don't understand how you end up with this reasoning.
The only one that knows if a dependency is optional is the developer
I agree.
of the extension so what is a workaround here is the huge mess
generator you are proposing.
As I already said 99% of our dependencies are really not optional, in
practice only a few flavor dependencies are and one or two other use
cases.
There is two different subjects that get mixed up here:
* clearly state in an extension what is absolutely required to work
and what is a nice to have, this is standard stuff and this is what we
are talking about here
* hack your way in the extension index to remove an extension without
removing the extension claiming to require that, this is at best
something for http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/Extension+Tweak
Or the UI of EM can provide a big red warning based dialog to allow admin to overwrite the
default behaviour with a message about the risk. Just best of both world proposal :), but
I don’t know how complex it could be. I am also fine with a Extension Tweak solution.
Thanks,
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Eduard Moraru <enygma2002(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
It`s very nice to hear we are progressing on this topic, but I`m not very
fond of the current solution. Marking dependencies as optional still puts
the responsibility on the developer to actually do that and makes the admin
dependent on the developer's choice and discipline. Feels more like a
workaround that we will end up having to support.
Working for building whitelists is a tedious process and we will surely
miss things, and this is only about things that we control in the standard
flavor. What about extensions and their dependencies?
Sure, as Caty suggests, one option is to make everything optional by
default and only have to explicitly specify if a dependency is mandatory.
Hoping we can get to a point where all the power is to the admin running
XWiki, not the developer.
Getting past the above "critique", it's still very nice to hear that we
will now have one solution to this old problem.
Thanks,
Eduard
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> >> On 5 Jul 2017, at 17:00, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I just implemented https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XCOMMONS-1229 which
> >> allows to indicate that a dependency will be installed by default but
> >> does not have a string dependency link with the extension, meaning
> >> that uninstalling it won't impact the backward dependencies (so they
> >> are not really backward dependencies in that case :)).
> >
> > This is very nice. What if I want to uninstall an extension which is NOT
> marked as optional (ie force uninstall at your own risks)?
>
> If it's not optional then... it's not optional and require to
> uninstall backward dependency.
>
> >
> >> Now we need to decide what exactly is optional in Standard flavor.
> >>
> >> Here are some ideas:
> >>
> >> * application-help-center
> >
> >> * xwiki-platform-menu-ui
> >
> >> * xwiki-platform-wiki-ui-mainwiki
> >
> >> * xwiki-platform-office-ui
> >> * xwiki-platform-invitation-ui
> >> * xwiki-platform-appwithinminutes-ui
> >
> > I think it needs some refactoring first since the pages it generates
> still need some pages from AWM.
>
> Actually I tough about that and IMO if an extension has AWM pages it
> should have a non optional dependency on AWM (i.e. it would be
> optional from flavor point of view but non optional from other
> extension point of view).
>
> >
> >> * xwiki-platform-linkchecker-ui
> >> * xwiki-platform-sandbox
> >
> >> * xwiki-platform-sharepage-ui
> >> * xwiki-platform-distribution-flavor-tour
> >> * application-templates-ui
> >
> >>
> >> I did not actually tried to uninstall those so it's possible it's
not
> >> a good idea to uninstall some of them right now (hardcoded use
> >> somewhere maybe).
> >>
> >> WDYT ?
> >
> > The list sounds good to start with (we need to test remove them first
> ofc).
> >
> > Thanks
> > -Vincent
> >
> >> --
> >> Thomas Mortagne
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Mortagne
>
--
Thomas Mortagne