4 Apr
2017
4 Apr
'17
2:46 p.m.
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
wrote:
Cool, then, IMO, we should be promoting only that, and not the XE base
distribution (which we could remove).
Thanks,
Eduard
thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com
So as I answered Vincent already: you want to get rid
of this flavor.
Not really, no. I *am* in favor of having a Base Flavor. It would be
invaluable for when writing other flavors (including the Defaut/Standard/KB
one), since it will take care of really basic setup, like the Velocity
Macro and such. Ideally, a new Flavor should depend on the Base, plus a
handful of applications/extensions and it should be set.
The point of a Flavor is to be installed as a top level UI, being a
XAR is enough to be a flavor dependency.
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Eduard Moraru
<enygma2002(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Here I was just talking about the fact that I prefer to emphasize the
"boilerplate" nature of this flavor, vs the Lite/Mini/etc. which might
imply less resource consumption. Nothing more.
Hi,
As I`ve mentioned in the other mail, I`d prefer "Base" or "Minimal"
(as
Vincent mentioned as well), mainly because I would not want users to be
encouraged to use it directly, but instead, to use a flavor that builds
on
> top of the Base and brings value (like the "Standard" flavor does).
Now, I`m getting a bit confused here as to the
nature of this base
flavor.
Is it a flavor or is it a distribution? Do we
also have an XWiki "Base"
distribution (war) that is slimmed down to support at least the XWiki
Base
*flavor*, and anything else will be installed
with EM, according to what
any additional "extended" flavor instructs (i.e. through its
dependencies)?
We have since 8.0 a XWiki distribution (with its WAR and the related
set of jetty/hsqldb, Debian packages, etc.) which contain pretty much
only the strict minimum or platform stuff you can't install easily
with EM (like plugins) and which ask you which flavor you want to
install in the Distribution Wizard (it does not declare any default UI
like XE does).
Thanks,
Eduard
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <
valicac(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> If we want to use this flavor as a dependency for the other Flavors that
> will be built on top, than I would like it to be called just "XWiki", so
> your 1).
> All the other flavors built on top would have composed names like "XWiki
> KB", "XWiki Groupware", etc.
>
> Otherwise my vote goes to 3) Base or Basic.
>
> I think we should first define what this contains. For me it should not
> just be EM, but all the default XWiki capabilities to create content:
from
> administration, to users, to templates, to
editors, to viewers, to
> livetable, to navigation, etc. :)
>
> Thanks,
> Caty
>
> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Thomas Mortagne <
thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com
> >
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 3 Apr 2017, at 17:22, Thomas Mortagne <
thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
>
wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net
> > wrote:
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>>> On 3 Apr 2017, at 16:18, Thomas Mortagne < > >
> > wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi devs,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Since 8.0 we have in xwiki-platform a flavor simply called
"XWiki
> > >>>> Flavor" which contains more or less the strict minimum to
have
> > >>>> something you can call an XWiki instance (Administration,
Extension
> > >>>> Manager, a home page,
etc.).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Since we want to promote the new Knowledge Base flavor have a
> > >>>> concurrent called "XWiki" is not really making it a
favor so we
> should
> > >>>> probably find another name for it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Here are some ideas:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 1) "XWiki" Flavor, it's Ok after all
> > >>>> 2) "Default" Flavor
> > >>>> 3) "Base” Flavor
> > >>>
> > >>>> 4) "Lite" Flavor
> > >>>> 5) "Mini" Flavor
> > >>>> 6) "Minimum" Flavor
> > >>>> 7) "Pico" Flavor
> > >>>> 8) <another word that means small> Flavor
> > >>>
> > >>> This raises a question: Why do we have such a flavor? I don’t
think
> we
> > need one if we have the KB flavor.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>> The only flavor that would make sense to me is a “Base” flavor
that
> is
> > **empty** (ie no wiki pages) and that serves as a common base minimum
for
> > other flavors. It would contain the bare
minimum to have an XWiki
> runtime.
> > >>
> > >> Note sure what is your point exactly. You want to discuss if it's
> > >> allowed to install it as flavor or if it's only a dependency of
> > >> another flavor ?
> > >
> > > My point is that we should only offer 2 things:
> > > 1) the KB flavor
> > > 2) or let the user not choose any flavor and have an empty wiki (no
> wiki
> > pages and minimal set of core extensions)
> >
> > So you want to remove this flavor. You don't need to install any
> > flavor to have an empty wiki.
> >
> > >
> > > What is the “XWiki Flavor” right now? You mentioned that it
contained
> > wiki pages (such as home page):
> > >
> > > "contains more or less the strict minimum to have
> > > something you can call an XWiki instance (Administration, Extension
> > > Manager, a home page, etc.).”
> > >
> > > This doesn’t look like the minimum to me.
> > >
> > > So the first thing to agree is about the scope of this “base”
flavor.
> > Then we can name it.
> >
> > When it was introduced it was defined as the flavor containing what we
> > think is common to any kind of flavor, the core UI extensions
> > basically like you have the core jar extensions on the WAR side.
> >
> > >
> > > If it’s a minimal empty flavor then the best name for me are:
> > > - “Minimal"
> > > - "Base"
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > -Vincent
> > >
> > >> Thanks
> > >>> -Vincent
> > >>>
> > >>>> I don't think keeping "XWiki" is such a great
idea. Default is
even
> > worst.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I like "Lite" but might sound too much like "the
very limited
free
> > >>>> version, you are going
to have advertisement in a month" theses
> days.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If I had to vote for only one it would be "Mini" but
I'm fine
with
> any
> > >>>> of the following proposals.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks,
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Thomas Mortagne
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Thomas Mortagne
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Mortagne
> >
>
--
Thomas Mortagne