Re: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] XWiki Core - Take 3

Hi devs, Since the first 2 takes did not pas, I’m making a new proposal taking

account the latest comments and making the minimal changes from the

situation to get a consensus. 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

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

“vertical” modules which are modules specific of a usage of XWiki. ** Examples of “core" modules: logging module, configuration module, distribution wizard, 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 that extensions that were developed inside the xwiki github organization continue to follow the dev practices of http://dev.xwiki.org Details: * We keep the current github organization names for now, i.e. “xwiki” and “xwiki-contrib”. * Each extension in xwiki-contrib continues to be an island with a leader (defined in jira) and continues to be able to decide what dev practices

should follow. The leader continues to be the one to contact when needing to perform a release. When the leader goes MIA the next person interested in working on the extension can become its new leader. * Since extensions moved from the xwiki github organization should continue to follow all the practices from http://dev.xwiki.org we need a way to indicate this so that code committed against those and PR can be reviewed in light of these practices. Thus we should encourage extensions to have a README file in each repo in xwiki-contrib that defines what practices the extension is following. We’ll also update

explanations about this (both for extension creators and for contributors to them). * Note that on contrib.xwiki.org we will propose a generic template for README files that should exist for all repos in xwiki-contrib. This template will include (but not be limited to): Dev practices to follow, Link to e.x.o, Status of the extension (useful to indicate non-working/abandoned extensions for example), link to its jira. * When moving an extension from the xwiki github org to xwiki-contrib, depending on the moved extension, the extension can keep its id (this allows the EM upgrade job to propose upgrading it). Whenever possible the extension id should be updated to follow the rules of contrib.xwiki.org

id of org.xwiki.contrib, artifact id matching the rules). In addition, since we don’t want to cause API breakages, the java packages can be kept as org.xwiki.* till the next large refactoring of the extension, at which time it should move to org.xwiki.contrib.*. Similarly the version of the moved extension should be kept and not be reset to 1.0-SNAPSHOT. We can probably develop some EM tooling in the future to handle relocation of extension id transparently. Please cast your vote. Here’s my +1 Thanks -Vincent PS: The previous 2 takes were proposal but I’m making it a VOTE now because I believe the “XWiki Core” strategy is important enough so that

need to be sure that committers agree (based on our voting rules). On 2 Aug 2015 at 19:43:18, vincent(a)massol.net (vincent(a)massol.net

vincent(a)massol.net)) wrote: discussion so far: > > * +1 from Thomas, Guillaume, Caty and Marius > * No answer from Edy on whether he’s ok with the proposal or not. Edy?

the points raised by Denis do not concern this discussion. Denis

about publishing and installing Extensions, whereas this proposal was

about a location for storing some extensions. Extensions can be developed anywhere and don’t have to go into this new proposed location. Denis,

you please review this new proposal with this in mind? using xwiki-contrib-sandbox. first proposal on the following points: > > * All our code is contributed so I don’t think we need to emphasize

point and I don’t think we need to have “contrib” in the name of the

repos. This will lead to shorter names which is better. Github will create redirects and the only downside is that we need to

it out for making repo changes) extensions, following the charter defined in the first proposal (we’ll

it). Committers are added extension by extension and will be voted on the devs list for now, by the xwiki core devs (we’ll tune that later on) Extensions in xwiki-extensions that are no longer working with the latest LTS and that nobody is fixing will move back to xwiki-incubator too. expand its goal. Right now it’s focused about the xwiki-contrib organization on GitHub. I propose to make it the wiki that explains how

make contributions to the XWiki ecosystem in general. We would move http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/Contributing + add pages for explaining how to contribute to xwiki-core, xwiki-extensions and xwiki-incubator. > * ATM we should continue to use the “org.xwiki.contrib" groupid for

in the xwiki-incubator and xwiki-extensions organizations. Ideally we should use org.xwiki.extension but it’s already used by the Extension module in xwiki-core. An option would have been to use org.xwiki.core for the core but that would break too much code so the only option is to keep having a special prefix for non-core code. Other ideas:

“org.xwiki.ext”, “org.xwiki.external”, “org.xwiki.addon”. The simplest is to keep “org.xwiki.contrib” I think, WDYT? extensions from the xwiki-core organization into xwiki-extensions,

with the FAQ Application, in order to start testing this new

(mailto:vincent@massol.net)) wrote: 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. 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

github organization) is increasing but the team stays relatively small organization, the less easy it is for non-“XWiki Dev Team” committers to participate and we want more contributions organization by only keeping “core” modules (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. distribution wizard, statistics application, annotations, active

one base flavor (the “XWiki” flavor), etc application, FAQ application, flavors (except the base flavor), etc xwiki github organization repos extensions that are maintained and developed following best practices. We need some way to maintain the quality of important extensions (it’s too complex to rename the org to “xwiki-core” IMO) there are called “XWiki Core Committers”). > > * “xwiki-contrib” is split into 2 github organizations (technically

rename it to “xwiki-contrib-sandbox”): proposed extensions or abandoned extensions are located > > ** “xwiki-contrib-extensions”, where maintained extensions are

> > * These 2 organizations are commonly referred to as “XWiki Contrib" > > * Same as now, anyone requesting a repo in xwiki-contrib-sandbox

be granted one and he/she’d be given write access to all repos in the xwiki-contrib-sandbox organization. xwiki-contrib-extensions. For example: 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

on extensions.xwiki.org(http://extensions.xwiki.org) with documentation 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

on the latest LTS. > > ** Generally follow the practices defined at http://dev.xwiki.org > > * Each extension in xwiki-extensions has a leader/maintainer.

the one proposing to move the extension from xwiki-sandbox to xwiki-extensions. He/she’s responsible for ensuring that the extension

regular releases and is maintained in general. He/she defines initially

list of committers in his email proposal for moving the extension. 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

up. > > * Contrib extensions keep using the org.xwiki.contrib package name

groupid as currently defined at http://contrib.xwiki.org all code in there, xwiki contrib is developed extension by extension

extension is an island). This allows anyone to propose extensions in

Contrib without the need for everyone to support them. _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs(a)xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs