On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote: All those extensions are part of the same project, released together, have the same bug tracker et source repository so "even as a dev, I don’t really" might be a little bit exaggerated :) "Group" could be usefull for other use cases but it's really not strong enough here. The goal is not to group some random independent extensions but to document a project which have a goal and produced various installable extensions to achieve this goal. -- Thomas Mortagne

The reason I said project wasn’t clear even for devs is because exo is not about development of extensions; it’s about using binaries. In a dev context project makes sense but in a runtime context, it doesn’t really. You don’t install a project and you don’t consider binaries to be a project. The goal of a project is to create something; it’s a work in progress. You do install a Product so that might be a better word but it looks too big. I still find “Group” the best work proposed so far. Let’s see what others think. Thanks -Vincent

Hi, I also didn't understood what 'Project' is about and means. To be honest I don't think e.x.o is the right place for it. IMO we should keep e.x.o just for installable extensions that can be used with Extension Manager. sure why we should add now the concept of 'project'. Our projects are listed in http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/Forge Thanks, Caty On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:

So what I find confusing is that we have a "project" - "type" and a "project" - "category". We could let's say have types like: "project", "snippet", "extension", etc. But we would need 'dynamic' categories. Only when choosing the type extension, the categories should be populated listing: application, macro, colortheme, skin, etc. And to be honest on the e.x.o homepage we should list just extension type. And in that case I don't know how people would find snippet or project. So maybe an idea would be to have separate subwikis for: snippets.xwiki.org and projects.xwiki.org (but this would need a separate application showing if the project is active, components, etc.) Thanks, Caty On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < valicac(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

Maybe an idea would be to extend the Repo app and have a Status: Retired, Unmaintained, Supported, Active, etc. (and decide the rules for an extension to switch states). Thanks, Caty On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 1:11 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) &lt;valicac(a)gmail.com > I see we also have an 'Authenticator' type. > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < > valicac(a)gmail.com> >> So what I find confusing is that we have a "project" - "type" and a >> "project" - "category". >> >> We could let's say have types like: "project", "snippet", "extension", >> etc. >> But we would need 'dynamic' categories. Only when choosing the type >> extension, the categories should be populated listing: application, macro, >> colortheme, skin, etc. >> >> And to be honest on the e.x.o homepage we should list just extension >> type. And in that case I don't know how people would find snippet or >> project. >> >> So maybe an idea would be to have separate subwikis for: >> snippets.xwiki.org and projects.xwiki.org (but this would need a >> separate application showing if the project is active, components, etc.) >> >> Thanks, >> Caty >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < >> valicac(a)gmail.com>> >>> I know it's a bit problematic since we use e.x.o also as a documentation >>> place, not just for installable things, so I'm not sure what is the best >>> thing to do. >>> >>> With the 'project' logic we would need to mark also "XWiki Office", >>> "XWiki Eclipse", etc. as having the "project" category. >>> >>> Also "Skins" are not installable with EM. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Caty >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < >>> valicac(a)gmail.com>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I also didn't understood what 'Project' is about and means. >>>> >>>> To be honest I don't think e.x.o is the right place for it. >>>> IMO we should keep e.x.o just for installable extensions that can be >>>> used with Extension Manager. >>>> >>>> From what I remember we will want to remove snippets from e.x.o, so not >>>> sure why we should add now the concept of 'project'. >>>> >>>> Our projects are listed in >>>> http://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/Forge >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Caty >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Vincent Massol &lt;vincent(a)massol.net&gt; >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > On 06 Jun 2016, at 11:20, Vincent Massol &lt;vincent(a)massol.net>>>>> > >>>>> >> >>>>> >> On 06 Jun 2016, at 11:00, Thomas Mortagne < >>>>> thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>>>>> >> >>>>> >> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 10:50 AM, Vincent Massol &lt;vincent(a)massol.net&gt; >>>>>>>>> >>> Hi Thomas, >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> On 06 Jun 2016, at 10:44, Thomas Mortagne < >>>>> thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> Hi xwikiers, >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> I just introduced a "Project" extension type on >>>>> http://extensions.xwiki.org. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> I needed a place to put a few words about OpenId Connect in >>>>> general, >>>>> >>>> the goal of the project, the various modules and what is common >>>>> >>>> between them, etc. It's also the parent space of the actual >>>>> >>>> extensions. It does not shows up in Extension Manager of course. >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> See >>>>> http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/OpenID+Connect/ >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> WDYT ? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> As a user I don’t think I’ll understand what “Project” means. >>>>> Actually even as a dev, I don’t really. I guess you mean it as a container >>>>> for other extensions. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> All those extensions are part of the same project, released >>>>> together, >>>>> >> have the same bug tracker et source repository so "even as a dev, I >>>>> >> don’t really" might be a little bit exaggerated :) >>>>> > >>>>> > The reason I said project wasn’t clear even for devs is because exo >>>>> is not about development of extensions; it’s about using binaries. >>>>> > >>>>> > In a dev context project makes sense but in a runtime context, it >>>>> doesn’t really. You don’t install a project and you don’t consider binaries >>>>> to be a project. The goal of a project is to create something; it’s a work >>>>> in progress. >>>>> > >>>>> > You do install a Product so that might be a better word but it looks >>>>> too big. >>>>> > >>>>> > I still find “Group” the best work proposed so far. >>>>> >>>>> s/work/word ;) >>>>> >>>>> -Vincent >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> > Let’s see what others think. >>>>> > >>>>> > Thanks >>>>> > -Vincent >>>>> > >>>>> >> I think “Group” would make more sense. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> "Group" could be usefull for other use cases but it's really not >>>>> >> strong enough here. The goal is not to group some random independent >>>>> >> extensions but to document a project which have a goal and produced >>>>> >> various installable extensions to achieve this goal. >>>>> >> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> WDYT? >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> In any case, we need a legend somewhere to explain the types. >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> Thanks >>>>> >>> -Vincent >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>> >>>>> >>>> Thomas Mortagne >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> devs mailing list >>>>> devs(a)xwiki.org >>>>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >

The only difference with an extension is that you are not installing it but all the rest need a displayer (authors, source, issues, etc.). Plus it's an entry point when you look OpenId Connect extensions. On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea &lt;mariusdumitru.florea(a)xwiki.com&gt; wrote: -- Thomas Mortagne