Note: It's important to write somewhere clearly that Xlet projects are not done by the xwiki dev team and not supported by the xwiki dev team (and thus that the quality depends on the contributor(s)).

Jean-Vincent Drean wrote: wrote: Yeah "contrib" has the advantage of being self-explanatory... I don't have strong feelings on this. "contrib" makes our job easier since it's less to explain, so Id be +0 for it over "xlet".

Jerome. _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs(a)xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote: +1 with the proposal but I'd prefer to name the project "contrib" since it's quite common and speaks for itself (particuraly considering the comment from Vincent above). WDYT ? See http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Index+of+%2Fcontrib%22

Thanks, JV. _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs(a)xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

Vincent Massol wrote: I agree. I think the best place for that would be a page on code.xwiki.org. I don't think we need a new wiki for the forge (except technically - for SVN), I would be to aggregate all info that concern contrib in code.xwiki.org since they are closely related. BTW I forgot to mention in the original email, I think we should propose a generic maven groupId for individuals or projects that don't want to come up with their own. Something like "org.xwiki.contrib".

wdyt ? Jerome. _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs(a)xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

On Oct 7, 2009, at 9:47 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: The current rule is org.xwiki.<top level project> so if contrib is a top level project it seems logical to have org.xwiki.contrib.

-Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs(a)xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 10:02, Vincent Massol &lt;vincent(a)massol.net&gt; wrote: contrib is a repository of top level projects not a project itself IMO

On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 13:43, Vincent Massol &lt;vincent(a)massol.net&gt; wrote: This is exactly what is sandbox, do you see any applications/plugins/etc. folders ?

As I said the way it's organized between plugins and applications currently is wrong IMO. Also note that with your arguments there is no reason to have enterprise and manager top projects, all their sub projects should be extracted and organized by type instead of project.

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 14:45, Jerome Velociter &lt;jerome(a)xwiki.com&gt; wrote: I'm not sure it's the right way, i think i would prefer to have the projects directly under xlet/ and have each project decide its own organization. It's a real pain currently to release plugin and applications which for lot of them should be released together, we should try to go the right way this time for a new repository.

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 15:22, Jerome Velociter &lt;jerome(a)xwiki.com&gt; wrote: Don't mix projects and maven artifacts, as i said most of our applications have a corresponding plugin/component with the same version you would like to release all in once. For me it should be based on what you want to build, we will never want to build all the xlet/applications/trunk/ but build/release/branch/etc.. xlet/myproject/trunk/ all in once will be needed. If we separate all, it will just make contributor life a pain for nothing, list project is already http://code.xwiki.org. It also mean we can handling committers rights by project, if we see this as a start of a XWiki forge we should definitely organize by project and not by maven artifacts types. At worst why not have theses artifact type project base folder but we also need a "project" folder or something like that where you can put a more important contribution which have more than just one artifact.

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 15:50, Jerome Velociter &lt;jerome(a)xwiki.com&gt; wrote: You can have exactly the same issue with type based organization, if you know xlet/extensions/trunk/toto42 is a extension you have no idea what it really is.

And as you said we are creating the project on svn so we can decide that a name does not fit with the provided description when someone ask for a new project in XWiki contrib repository. Also i really think we should think of security, even if we don't do it from the starts, if we organize by project it will be a lot easier to add rights management support the same we do this with project in svn.xwiki.org based on some ProjectClass objects rights in forge.xwiki.org for example instead of based on a group in some wiki. Would be a good start for a real XWiki forge and we already have everything we need to do it.

On 10/06/2009 04:08 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: +1, I think that this kind of organization also matches the normal discovery / exploration path. It happens often enough that an extra functionality on top of xwiki requires application, plugin/module/component and why not a bit of skin. It would be easier, for who would want to find out more about such an application, to go to a single place (contribution/washingdishesapp) and discover all sources in one place, without having to know from the beginning that it's a plugin and then some pages (most of the times when you're interested in an application, this is not the first thing you find out), hopefully it would be able to find that out by looking at the sources and digging further. baseline is that it would make it easier to learn for contributors and more natural, even if for us, the experts, another organization might seem better. For the record, I consider this annoying on code.xwiki.org, the fact that if you want to add extra functionality on top of xwiki, you have to go to several different categories of code to finally find how to add it -- it should be all in a single place, with instructions about how to make it happen.

Thanks, Anca > >> >> Jerome. >> >> Jerome Velociter wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> The subject has been discussed already, see for example >>> http://markmail.org/message/h5e2qinrhsf2slww >>> >>> The idea is to create a new top level project for modules >>> (modules in >>> the sense of everything applications, macros, components, >>> plugins, skin >>> extensions, etc.) that are not part of any products (or the >>> platform) >>> and that are not necessarily contributed by the XWiki development >>> team. >>> >>> The difference with the sandbox is that sandbox is a place for >>> modules >>> being incubated, and that are not in a finished state. Thus, I >>> think one >>> of the rule for introducing new modules in the xlet repository >>> would be >>> that a functional version of the module should be released and >>> available >>> for download (for example on code.xwiki.org). >>> >>> The name "xlet" is the name we've use historically to talk about >>> this >>> repository, this is open for discussion. (personally I like the >>> name - >>> we have to agree this is how we want to name a XWiki "pluggable >>> module" >>> in the large sense). >>> >>> Here is my +1 for the above >>> >>> I would also like to propose that we create a new category of JIRA >>> projects : "XWiki Contributed Xlets" (or equivalent name) for such >>> projects that desire to track issues for their released module, >>> and have >>> the tracker hosted by XWiki.org. I believe this will make easier >>> to have >>> real release cycles for such modules (for example, we can link to >>> the >>> JIRA project from the code.xwiki.org "module" page so that users >>> can >>> report issues instead of using the comments, we can use JIRAs >>> changelog >>> for release notes on the download page, etc.) >>> >>> And my +1 for this second proposal >>> >>> Please, let me know what you think >>> Jerome.

On 10/08/2009 03:15 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: true, but we could categorize from a functionality / user pov, not a technical implementation pov. probably, but the fact that, when searching for 'washing dishes application", one would get 3 results (one for the app, one for the underlying plugin and one for the skin), is puzzling ("wha' there's more than 1 app for washing dishes? which one I need to install? I want an application, I don't want the plugin.damn it doesn't work. and why doesn't it look like the screenshot? ah, I need a skin"). search would only point you in various places of the non-flat hierarchy and you'd still need to understand the whole hierarchy to figure out why, and how these dots connect together. when I first tried to use the code.xwiki.org to install an application, I hit these problems, and I did have some experience with xwiki at that point.

Thanks, Anca _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs(a)xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs