26 Aug
2016
26 Aug
'16
1:24 p.m.
Guillaume,
The risk of dead code is always present at a developer.
But the addition of inclusions seems to make this risk higher for you.
Obviously we develop on very different wikis.
Mine tends to be having several development traces, often parallel,
sometimes not, and I will only reinstall if I really need it.
When developing xars, you seem to be trusting that yours contain just a few.
Because mine is crowdy, I will not trust a XAR export and will only pick
the necessary files and/or elements form a xar export, if at all, or
undergo a deep cleaning (which is typical at start).
Because yours (I assume) is somewhat clean, you trust a xar export and
commit it the eyes shut.
Thus introducing an include that would be forgotten makes it probable
for you and not for me, which is what you state.
What I can offer is to add to my ready available code that the validate
Mojo to check that no file that is not included in in the source tree.
Useful?
Offering a diff is tempting but it's a lot more complex I feel (e.g.
it's better if it's three way which developers rarely all have on a
single disk, one or two of them being on a versioning server).
Paul
Guillaume Delhumeau wrote:
I would be very concerned if we have wiki pages with
dead code in some
repository.
I am very skeptical, because if we cannot rely on the standard exporter to
generate the source correctly, who will use these source files? When you
develop an application, do you write it in the XML page in your repository
or directly in your wiki?
I am a bit conservative here and I don't want to block you, but I really
wonder if the advantages you mention worth the pain of being sure we don't
have dead code, and manually cutting/pasting some bit of the code from a
file to an other everytime you commit a page (and I do it often).