19 Mar
2015
19 Mar
'15
10:48 a.m.
OK, but if we don't keep track of the relocation of groupId/artifactId,
I wonder how you will be able to manage the upgrade (since it seems it
is a topic you and Vincent are interested in). Am I missing something?
Should I put this information in another way somewhere in the root POM
or in another file?
Sincerely,
On 19/03/2015 10:41, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
Vincent was not really talking about Maven relocation
specifically but
simply how to EM can find the new version of an extension that changed
its id.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Jean SIMARD <jean.simard(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
--
Jean Simard
jean.simard(a)xwiki.com
Research engineer at XWiki SAS
http://www.xwiki.com
Committer on the XWiki.org project
http://www.xwiki.org
Hi Vincent,
I'd like to have more precision on the "relocation" you're talking
about.
For example, we have this at the moment
+ application-forum
| + pom.xml
->org.xwiki.contrib.forum:application-forum [xar]
We'd like to transform the hierarchy of Maven modules/submodules into
the following structure
+ application-forum
| + pom.xml -> [pom]
| + application-forum-ui/
| | + pom.xml -> [xar]
| + application-forum-test/
| | + pom.xml -> [pom]
| | + application-forum-test-pageobjects/
| | | + pom.xml -> [jar]
| | | + src/
| | + application-forum-test-tests/
| | | + pom.xml -> [jar]
| | | + src/
But now, I'm looking at relocation guide on Maven
https://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-relocation.html#How_to_relocate_…
and I'm not sure of what I need to do. From the link, I understand that
I should do another pom.xml for each old release. Let say I will take
care only of the last release at the moment (1.9.3 for Forum App). Then
I should add a submodule to the root that looks like the following?
+ application-forum
| + pom.xml -> [pom]
| ...
| + application-forum-1.9.3
| | + pom.xml -> [xar?] (see below for the content)
pom.xml
-----
<project>
<modelVersion>4.0.0</modelVersion>
<groupId>org.xwiki.contrib.forum</groupId>
<artifactId>application-forum</artifactId>
<version>1.9.3</version>
<distributionManagement>
<relocation>
<artifactId>application-forum-ui</artifactId>
</relocation>
</distributionManagement>
</project>
-----
Thanks,
On 19/03/2015 09:08, vincent(a)massol.net wrote:
Hi Caty,
See below.
On 18 Mar 2015 at 19:29:17, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
(valicac@gmail.com(mailto:valicac@gmail.com)) wrote:
--
Jean Simard
jean.simard(a)xwiki.com
Research engineer at XWiki SAS
http://www.xwiki.com
Committer on the XWiki.org project
http://www.xwiki.org
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs Hi,
I want to write automated tests for some contrib applications, but I need
you help on some questions.
== Prb 1. Folder Structure + Changing IDs ==
Currently the majority of applications don't have modules.
You mean submodules I guess since they’re a module (maven module) themselves.
Also some applications have IDs that don't
correspond with the contrib
standard: sometimes wrong groupId like 'org.xwiki.contrib.forum', sometimes
random artifactId.
Why would ‘org.xwiki.contrib.forum’ be a wrong group id?
The rule is defined here
http://contrib.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#HHostingtools and a module can have
org.xwiki.contrib or org.xwiki.contrib.<shortprojetname>.
When wanting to change the groupId for
'org.xwiki.contrib.forum' I was told
that we should change it only if we have a very good reason, otherwise
changing the ID will resolve in upgrading problems within the Extension
Manager. Unfortunately I don't remember exactly the problem with the
changing of the ID, I just know I don't need to do it :) (//sorry Thomas)
We support relocation so the extension id (groupId+artifactId) can change. The only
negative effect is that XWiki will not propose an upgrade automatically when the new
version comes out with a new extensionId. (I’d love to brainstorm about finding ways to
handle this with Thomas though).
Example:
https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/application-forum
Theoretically, wanting to add tests I would need to create two modules:
- application-forum-test
- application-forum-ui, and move the current sources here.
Unfortunately this means a change in the ID.
Are 'adding tests' a good reason to change the ID?
Should I not change the ID, and just add a test module?
- application-forum-test
- src/main/resources
I’m in favor of changing the extension id and add relocation (it was done for this
purpose). This is what we did in xwiki-platform for a lot of modules.
== Prb 2. Naming standards ==
We have some conventions on contrib.xwiki.org about name of the project.
We should add maybe some more examples on groupId and artifactId.
Also when looking at the test modules names, some applications have:
- {{full-repository-name}}-tests
- {{full-repository-name}}-test
- {{partial-repository-name}}-test
- {{random-repository-name}}-test
- test
Where? AFAIK I’ve been the one doing most of the tests relocation in xwiki-platform and
our naming rule has always been the same. For example:
xwiki-platform-faq-test/
|_ xwiki-platform-faq-test-tests/
|_ …
Maybe we should agree also on this and document
it.
I guess the correct name would be:
- {{full-repository-name}}-test
-- {{full-repository-name}}-test-pageobjects
-- {{full-repository-name}}-test-tests
- {{full-repository-name}}-ui
Yes. Some conventions are already documented here:
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HBuildBe…
Also if we are 'discovering' some
applications that don't correspond to the
standard, do we change them or do we let them be? Since changing means a
change in the ID :P
I’d say we change them.
Since in theory we should have automated tests
for all our applications,
should we add a convention to always create a
- {{full-repository-name}}-ui ?
Yes. This is what I do when I create a new "top level" module.
Additional question: Also when we will transfer
from platform to contrib,
are we going to rename the modules?
I think we discussed this and we said we would change the id but not change the package
names for now to not break backward compat. Would need to read again the mail thread. In
any case we still have some decisions to make on that. I’ve been wanting to do this move
but first I wanted to implement the cleanup/removal of xwiki-enterprise to make way for
flavors.
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs