2 Nov
2010
2 Nov
'10
11:10 a.m.
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
2 Nov
2 Nov
1:30 p.m.
+1
Thanks,
Marius
On 11/02/2010 12:10 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
1:39 p.m.
+1 provided that it's shown in the syntax display name that this is
still in an experimental state.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
2:58 p.m.
On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
+1 provided that it's shown in the syntax display
name that this is
still in an experimental state.
It's already displayed like this thomas.
Thanks
-Vincent
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
>
> Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
>
> The rationale is:
> * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide
feedback
>
> Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
>
> Here's my +1
>
> WDYT?
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
4:19 p.m.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 14:58, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
Yes i know, it's more a reason why i vote +1 than a request
+1 provided that it's shown in the syntax
display name that this is
still in an experimental state.
It's already displayed like this thomas.
Thanks
-Vincent
--
Thomas Mortagne
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
>
> Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
>
> The rationale is:
> * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide
feedback
>
> Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
>
> Here's my +1
>
> WDYT?
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
4:32 p.m.
+1
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 15:58, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
+1 provided that it's shown in the syntax
display name that this is
still in an experimental state.
It's already displayed like this thomas.
Thanks
-Vincent
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by
default
for 2.6RC1.
>
> Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
>
> The rationale is:
> * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to
provide
feedback
>
> Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it
should be enough to let people know about its status.
>
> Here's my +1
>
> WDYT?
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
2:43 p.m.
+1
Regards,
Sorin B.
On 11/02/2010 12:10 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
2:46 p.m.
On 11/02/2010 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Initially I was 0, but I've changed my mind to +1, since otherwise users
won't be able to easily test the new features (icon URLs), and the
syntax won't be tested enough.
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
3:54 p.m.
+1 as long as it's marked experimental.
For the future, when the syntax is stable, what migration path do we
offer ? An option to automatically migrate all 2.0 content to 2.1 ?
Also when changing syntax in the panel, should we provide specific
migrators to migrate a page from 1.0 directly to 2.1 like we do from
2.0 to 2.1 ? from 2.0 to 2.1 ? (this one probably is not needed)
Jerome.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
5:59 p.m.
Btw we should tag as "experimental" other features like the extension manager
(beta is probably not the right naming actually), as well as user directory, etc.
Gregory GUENEAU
XWiki Chief Strategy Officer
+33 6 07 01 70 65
gregory(a)xwiki.com
-from my iPad-
On 2 nov. 2010, at 15:54, Jerome Velociter <jerome(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
+1 as long as it's marked experimental.
For the future, when the syntax is stable, what migration path do we
offer ? An option to automatically migrate all 2.0 content to 2.1 ?
Also when changing syntax in the panel, should we provide specific
migrators to migrate a page from 1.0 directly to 2.1 like we do from
2.0 to 2.1 ? from 2.0 to 2.1 ? (this one probably is not needed)
Jerome.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
9:56 p.m.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 15:54, Jerome Velociter <jerome(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
+1 as long as it's marked experimental.
For the future, when the syntax is stable, what migration path do we
offer ? An option to automatically migrate all 2.0 content to 2.1 ?
Also when changing syntax in the panel, should we provide specific
migrators to migrate a page from 1.0 directly to 2.1 like we do from
2.0 to 2.1 ? from 2.0 to 2.1 ? (this one probably is not needed)
There is no such thing as migrator from 1.0 to 2.0, you can convert
any supported input syntax as any supported output syntax in the UI.
Jerome.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
--
Thomas Mortagne
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
10:42 p.m.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Thomas Mortagne
<thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 15:54, Jerome Velociter
<jerome(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
By migrator I meant converter.
OK did not know the UI supported all syntaxes.
Still at some point we might want to propose a "global" converter (so
a "migrator" I guess) from 2.0 to 2.1, since the conversion should be
rather safe.
WDYT ?
+1 as long as it's marked experimental.
For the future, when the syntax is stable, what migration path do we
offer ? An option to automatically migrate all 2.0 content to 2.1 ?
Also when changing syntax in the panel, should we provide specific
migrators to migrate a page from 1.0 directly to 2.1 like we do from
2.0 to 2.1 ? from 2.0 to 2.1 ? (this one probably is not needed)
There is no such thing as migrator from 1.0 to 2.0, you can convert
any supported input syntax as any supported output syntax in the UI.
Jerome.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
5:04 p.m.
+1
Thanks,
Florin Ciubotaru
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default
for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to
provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it
should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
6:36 p.m.
+1,
JV.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be
enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
7:35 p.m.
+1
Denis
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 18:36, Jean-Vincent Drean <jean-vincent(a)drean.org>wrote;wrote:
+1,
JV.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by
default for
2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is:
* Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to
provide
feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it
should
be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
5120
days inactive
5120
days old
14 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
Denis Gervalle -
Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) -
Florin Ciubotaru -
Gregory GUENEAU -
Jean-Vincent Drean -
Jerome Velociter -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Sorin Burjan -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol