4 Dec
2014
4 Dec
'14
9:44 a.m.
Hi Edy,
On 3 Dec 2014 at 22:36:34, Eduard Moraru
(enygma2002@gmail.com(mailto:enygma2002@gmail.com)) wrote:
xwiki-contrib-extensions
I didn’t proposa this for a very simple reason: One very big point of this proposal (if
not the main one) is to make equal citizenship in the XWiki community between XWiki Core
Devs and Contributors of xwiki-contrib. It’s about shifting the balance: have XWiki Core
devs focus on core and have contributors focus on providing extensions to the core. Thus
they need to have separate decision power.
In addition, not all Core Devs may want to spend extra time to handle Contrib Extensions.
This is why it’ll be a mail asking who’s interested. If Core Devs are not interested I’ll
certainly not force them to have to attend Contrib duties, that would be stupid IMO and
not productive since they wouldn’t participate if they’re not interested, and thus block
decision making. I remind you that when there’s a VOTE it’s a duty of the committers to
reply (among other duties, which span doing code review, etc).
"A generic *maven groupId*: org.xwiki.contrib (or org.xwiki.contrib.> name> if
the project has several modules). That's until the project reaches
a certain size and visibility, in which case it can have its own maven
group id."
Projects part of xwiki-contrib-extensions seem to qualify the for the
"until the project reaches a certain size and visibility" part.
Do we really want to enforce the org.xwiki.contrib group? Personally, I
never did understand *why* we are enforcing it, above the simple fact that
we just can.
The reason is simple, each project needs a group id for its artifact. When people join
xwiki-contrib it’s about joining a community and doing community-based developmment (ie
the code doesn’t belong to you anymore). So imagine that I publish an extension with a
groupid of “net.massol.vincent” or “com.google.xxx", do you think it makes this
project a nice community project owned by everyone? :)
The second reason reason is that we wanted to keep open the org.xwiki.XXX (where XXX !=
“contrib”) namespace for the xwiki github organization. Imagine some uses org.xwiki.job
for an Extension about Job Reruitment. Then Thomas would not have been able org.xwiki.job
for the Job module he coded...
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 5:16 PM, Thomas Mortagne
wrote:
This proposal and the one referenced are orthogonal.
That said, my proposal does solve a lot of the problem you mention since:
- we move several extensions out of xwiki-platform into xwiki-contrib-extensions and thus
they’ll have their lifecycle and can specify the dep versions they wish
- I have explicitly mentioned in my proposal that a good condition for joining
xwiki-contrib-extensions would be that: "The extension should work with the latest
LTS version of XWiki + the latest stable version of XWiki (right now that would be 5.4.5 +
6.3).”. Note that I said “should” and not “must” since this is hard to do *initially* if
we move out extensions from xwiki-platform but as time goes by, XWiki versions will
increase but the moved extension doesn’t have to increase its dep versions at the same
rate.
- what will remain in xwiki-platform is just core extensions, i.e. extensions that are
bundled and that you don’t install!
This proposal has not much to do with "XWiki Core" since it’s about extensions
currently in xwiki-contrib. Also AFAIK we’ve already agreed that we want these apps to
work with the latest XWiki LTS (except when they have to use newer APIs/features that only
exist in more recent versions). And this is very compatible with my proposal: "The
extension should work with the latest LTS version of XWiki + the latest stable version of
XWiki (right now that would be 5.4.5 + 6.3).”
So I don’t see any problem at all. Either I don’t understand your point or you’re trying
to make this proposal something much bigger than what it is.
Sounds good. +1
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 3:57 PM, vincent(a)massol.net
wrote:
So no plan at this point to address
http://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/zohkn73srh7dwom4 and Hi committers (and devs in general),
I’m submitting to you this idea, to try to improve the xwiki open source
project
and to give it a new dynamism. I believe the topics discussed below
are made even more important since we’re soon going to develop the notion
of flavors in XWiki.
Note that this proposal obsoletes the
http://markmail.org/message/4hglttljiio5v2km
proposal (i.e. the move of
some extensions in the xwiki github organization), which itself was
obsoleting http://markmail.org/message/ppw2slpgqou2ihai
Issues to solve
===============
* The scope of the code maintained by the XWiki Dev Team (== the xwiki
github
organization) is increasing but the team stays relatively small
* The more stuff we move into the repos of the
xwiki github
organization, the less easy it is for non-“XWiki Dev Team” committers
to
participate and we want more contributions
Proposed solution
=================
Executive summary:
* Reduce the scope of all the code located in the xwiki github
organization by
only keeping “core” modules
* A “core" module is defined by being a
generic transversal module (i.e.
that can be used in lots of XWiki flavors, if not
all). This is opposed to
“vertical” modules which are modules specific of a usage of XWiki.
** Examples of “core" modules: logging
module, configuration module,
distribution wizard, statistics application,
annotations, active installs,
one base flavor (the “XWiki” flavor), etc
** Example of “vertical” modules: meeting manager
application, blog
application, FAQ application, flavors (except the base flavor),
etc
Some consequences:
* We need a new location for several modules that would go out of the
xwiki github
organization repos
* It would be good to separate sandbox extensions
from 1st class
extensions that are maintained and developed following best
practices. We
need some way to maintain the quality of important extensions
Detailed Implementation:
* The “xwiki” github organization’s description becomes “XWiki Core”
(it’s too
complex to rename the org to “xwiki-core” IMO)
* “XWiki Dev Team” becomes the “XWiki Core Team”
(and committers in
there are called “XWiki Core Committers”).
* “xwiki-contrib” is split into 2 github
organizations (technically we
rename it to “xwiki-contrib-sandbox”):
** “xwiki-contrib-sandbox” (or
“xwiki-incubator”), where newly proposed
extensions or abandoned extensions are
located
** “xwiki-contrib-extensions”, where maintained
extensions are located.
* These 2 organizations are commonly referred to as “XWiki Contrib"
* Same as now, anyone requesting a repo in xwiki-contrib-sandbox would
be granted
one and he/she’d be given write access to all repos in the
xwiki-contrib-sandbox organization.
* We define some rules for graduating from
xwiki-contrib-sandbox to
xwiki-contrib-extensions. For example:
** The extension should have been in
xwiki-contrib-sandbox at least 6
months (this gives time to see if the extension is
maintained during that
time and will survive the test of time - most extensions will die in the
first months)
** The extension should have had more than 2
releases and be published
on extensions.xwiki.org(http://extensions.xwiki.org) with
documentation
** The extension should work with the latest LTS
version of XWiki + the
latest stable version of XWiki (right now that would be
5.4.5 + 6.3). Note
that if the extension has to use new API it’s ok that it doesn’t work on
the latest LTS.
** Generally follow the practices defined at
http://dev.xwiki.org
* Each extension in xwiki-extensions
has a leader/maintainer. He/she’s the one
proposing to move the extension
from xwiki-sandbox
xwiki-contrib-sandbox
to xwiki-extensions. He/she’s responsible for
ensuring that the extension
gets regular releases and is maintained in general. He/she defines
initially the list of committers in his email proposal for moving the
extension.
I propose that all XWiki core committers are, by default, members of this
PMC. They can choose not to get involved in every decision, but they should
have a voice if they need it, without needing to pass through a vote
process from the current members of the PMC. * We create a PMC (Project Management Committee)
for XWiki Contrib,
generally in charge of both xwiki-contrib-sandbox and
xwiki-contrib-extensions (voting new extensions in
xwiki-contrib-extensions, vote new PMC members, etc). To bootstrap it, I
would send a mail on devs@ asking who’s interested to be part of this
committee. I expect some core committers + some contrib committers to stand
up.
* Contrib extensions keep using the org.xwiki.contrib
package name and
groupid as currently defined at http://contrib.xwiki.org
I don't have something in particular against new
projects in
xwiki-contrib-sandbox, but for projects we are migrating from the xwiki
organization, if they are java projects, we are forcing anybody that was
using them in the past to rewrite their code (so no longer a simple
dependency change in their pom.xml), since package name would change (due
to our maven group id policy) and any code using those packages needs an
update.
This is still a grey area for projects moved out of the xwiki github organization. For
groupid/artifact it’s not really a problem with the relocation feature. For package names
it’s much harder and I propose an exception there till the next big refactoring of the
module when it’ll next break backward compat. That said there won’t be many java code
moved out, it’ll be mainly XARs and thus the problem won’t happen much.
You forgot to voice your opinion about this proposal!
Thanks
-Vincent
Thanks,
Eduard
> >
> > Note: The idea is that xwiki core is developed as a team maintaining all
> code in there, xwiki contrib is developed extension by extension (each
> extension is an island). This allows anyone to propose extensions in XWiki
> Contrib without the need for everyone to support them.
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > Thanks
> > -Vincent