October 2018 - xwiki-devs@xwiki.org

[xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Use discourse for the "dev" mailing list
by Guillaume Delhumeau 18 Sep '19

18 Sep '19

Hi devs, I think we are now satisfied with our experimentation with the "users" mailing list on discourse. I propose you to move the "dev" ML too. My main point is that it allows advanced formatting (which is good when you have complex proposals), meanwhile the formatting is lost with our archiving tool like markmail (it's plain text). Here is my +1. Thanks, -- Guillaume Delhumeau (guillaume.delhumeau(a)xwiki.com) Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS Committer on the XWiki.org project

3 5

[xwiki-devs] [Proposal] Update database support strategy
by Vincent Massol 05 Jun '19

05 Jun '19

Hi devs, We currently have https://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DatabaseSupportStrategy However, it doesn’t say explicitly which versions we officially support: * For HSQLDB it says 2.3.3 which is wrong since the latest version is 2.4.1 * For MySQL it says 5.x but doesn’t specify which specific version(s) * Same for other DBs We cannot really support every versions since supporting means testing too. So what I propose: Question 1: definition * We say we support the latest stable version of the databases for a given version cycle ** For MySQL, it’s the latest of the 5.x cycle, which is 5.7.24 as of today (see https://hub.docker.com/_/mysql/) ** For PostgreSQL, it’s the latest of the 9.x cycle, which is 9.6.10 as of today (see https://hub.docker.com/_/postgres/) ** For Oracle, it’s the latest of the 11.x cycle, which is 11.2.0.4.0 as of today (see https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/database/enterprise-edition/downloads/in…) Question 2: review what we support * For MySQL I think we could also start supporting MySQL 8.x (ie the latest version of that cycle). We have an issue open for it currently: https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-15215 * For PostgreSQL we could also start supporting versions 11.x (ie the latest version of that cycle) * For Oracle, we could also start supporting versions 12.x (ie the latest version of that cycle) Question 3: decide if we drop some support * Is there any cycle that we should support for? Right now I think that MySQL 5.x is still heavily used, same for postgreSQL 9.x I guess. Don’t know for Oracle. * Any idea? So WDYT about the 3 questions? Thanks -Vincent

7 32

[xwiki-devs] OpenCollective for XWiki Community
by Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 23 May '19

23 May '19

Hi devs, This is a proposal for the content we would have if we were to create an OpenCollective account for XWiki. Take a look at https://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/XWikiOpenCollective The issues we need to solve / validate are: A. Decide on the URL name (xwiki is already taken by XWiki SAS) B. See if XWiki SAS can act like our Fiscal host C. Validate the tiers and content https://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/XWikiOpenCollective#HTiers (we might need more details on how the "Bug Fixer" works in case we agree to it) Let me know what you think, Caty

2 14

[xwiki-devs] [proposal] Process to handle Pull Requests
by Ludovic Dubost 10 May '19

10 May '19

Hi devs, I don't think there is currently a process that is in place to handle pull requests and I have the feeling that the way there are handled today is a bit random. There are usually comments sent out on each pull request but sometimes it seems that some pull requests are going in sleep mode and it's not clear who is in charge. I would like to suggest that a process is put in place where it's clear who is responsible for a pull request and a status is given to the contributors that propose that pull request. Something like: Assigned developer: XXXX Status: New -> new pull request, not yet assigned Assigned -> assigned to a developer, he is in charge of reviewing the pull request and ask for modifications or accept it. The developer can auto assign it to himself. If nobody does, we need to decide how they will be taken into account. ModificationsRequired -> for now rejected with comments. Contributor needs to apply comments and then change back to Assigned for further evaluation VoteRequired -> there are no more comments, but a vote is required as the changes to XWiki core are important WaitingFinalAuthorization -> optional step for complex patches where a additional authorization would be required (need to define who would be the persons that give the authorization) WaitingApplication -> there are no more comments and no changes or vote required. The pull request can be applied and is waiting for a developer to apply it Abandoned -> contributors is abandoning the pull request (cannot do the changes, no more time, etc..) Rejected -> pull request is rejected (quality not enough, etc..) Applied -> pull request is applied What do you think ? Ludovic -- Ludovic Dubost Founder and CEO Blog: http://blog.ludovic.org/ XWiki: http://www.xwiki.com Skype: ldubost GTalk: ldubost

7 12

[xwiki-devs] [WCAG] Reference validator
by Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 20 Mar '19

20 Mar '19

Hi devs, I've started to analyze the 971 tests failing on webstandards related to the WCAG validation. I plan to create issues in order for us to fix the errors. The problem I have is that we were validating against the Dutch Guidelines validation tool (previously http://www.webrichtlijnen.nl/english/testing) but this tool has been discontinued by the Dutch Ministry in July 2017, see https://www.digitoegankelijk.nl/onderwerpen/testen/nieuws/2017/04/25/gewoon… The difference between the W3C WCAG rules (https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/) and the Dutch Guidelines was that the latest were more strict. Also WCAG specification advanced to version 2.1 in Jun 2018. Since I don't have much experience in the way we've implemented the validator, I'm asking if anyone has any idea of another validator we could replace this one with (in case we want this). Else, I will try to investigate and find a replacement for a new reference validator. Currently the plan is to fix our code to match the current definitions and in cases that are not covered by W3C WCAG and where we want to add "exceptions" I test also online on: * https://ckeditor.com/ckeditor-4/accessibility-checker/ and * http://wave.webaim.org/ Let me know if you have any objections to the 2 tools mentioned above. I've started the investigation at: https://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/WCAG10x we can discuss each error and "exception" on the individual issues. Thanks, Caty

3 4

[xwiki-devs] [contrib] Page Preview Popover extension request
by Stéphane Laurière 19 Feb '19

19 Feb '19

Hi all, I would like to contribute an extension that will display page preview popovers when hovering wiki links, similarly to what MediaWiki offers: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Page_Previews https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/05/09/page-previews-documentation/ Its name could be 'application-page-preview-popover' - what do you think? As discussed with Caty yesterday, the extension will use the Bootstrap popovers. Should you have any need or suggestion, please let me know. If the name is ok, can I ask you for the creation of a repository and JIRA project? Stéphane -- Stéphane Laurière XWiki www.xwiki.com @slauriere

6 10

[xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Drop support for IE11
by Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 24 Jan '19

24 Jan '19

IE is the last browser we are supporting at a particular version, see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/BrowserSupportStrategy . For all the other browsers, we are supporting just the latest release. We are supporting the latest version of Microsoft Edge since XWiki 9.9, starting from 24/Oct/17. Microsoft Edge replaced Internet Explorer as the default web browser since the release of Windows 10 (launched Jul 2015). Internet Explorer 11 is maintained on Windows 10 for compatibility purposes, but is deprecated in favor of Edge and is no longer actively developed. We discussed dropping IE11 in the past Oct 6, 2017 (see https://xwiki.markmail.org/thread/qsrkka6zfrmyxv3d) but the vote failed. Some updated statistics: -------------------------------------------------- XWiki.org's 1 year traffic (between Sep 30, 2016 - Sep 30, 2017) compared to Oct 1, 2017 - May 31, 2018: - Internet Explorer dropped from (5.84%) to (4.65%) -- from this percentage, IE 11 usage has increased from (88.43%) to (88.76%) - Edge increased from (1.56%) to (1.84%). In terms of Worldwide market share for Desktops, for the past 12 months (according to http://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/desktop/ ), we have Sep, 2016 - Sep, 2017 compared to May 2017 - May 2018: - Internet Explorer dropped from 8.21% to 6.97% - Edge dropped from 4.3% to 4.15% In May 2018, Global Market Share Worldwide for All Platforms contains: - Chrome 58.09% - Safari 13.78% - UC Browser 8.16% - Firefox 5.27% - Opera 3.68% - Internet Explorer combined is at 3.08% (with IE 11 having 2.65%. IE11 in August 2017 had 3.04%) - Edge combined having 1.91% (Edge combined in August 2017 had 1.8%) - etc. -------------------------------------------------- In terms of statistics, IE11 is more used than Microsoft Edge. The only argument of dropping IE11 is that it's a browser that is deprecated for about 3 years, and it's limiting the usage of newer specifications (like CSS Flex, Grid, etc.) I'm curios about how this period of supporting both IE11 and Edge went, and if you have other examples of things you wanted to use and are not supported by IE11. Thanks, Caty

3 4

[xwiki-devs] [Proposal] Improve our Test Coverage strategy (TAKE 2)
by Vincent Massol 10 Jan '19

10 Jan '19

Hi devs, We started discussing a first global test coverage strategy in https://markmail.org/message/grphwta63pp5p4l7 I’d like to propose some updates and tuning now that we have a Clover Jenkins pipeline working (brainstormed with Simon): Here’s the new proposal: * We run the Clover Jenkins pipeline every night (between 11PM-8AM) * The pipeline sends an email whenever the new report has modules lowering the global TPC score compared to the baseline report (negative contribution per module) * The baseline report is the report generated just after each XS release. This means that we keep the same baseline during a XS release ** Technically it means that the pipeline will update the latest.txt file (which contains the clover report timestamp) when it notices a version change * We add a step in the Release Plan Template to have the report passing before we can release. * The RM is in charge of a release from day 1 to the release day (already the case), and is also in charge of making sure that the global coverage job failures get addressed before the release day so that we’re ready on the release day. Options: * Make it easier and only fail the pipeline job when the global TPC value is lower than the baseline (vs failing whenever a module has negative contribution) WDYT? Thanks -Vincent

5 9

[xwiki-devs] [Proposal] Get rid of sonar.xwiki.org?
by Vincent Massol 07 Jan '19

07 Jan '19

Hi devs, Context: * I lost the config on ci.xwiki.org to push maven results to sonar.xwiki.org. I can find them back for sure but will take me a bit of time. * We don’t use sonar.xwiki.org that much * We now have https://sonarcloud.io/organizations/xwiki/projects to which we can push results from our builds * https://sonarcloud.io/organizations/xwiki/projects is always up to date in term of sonar version and we don’t need to maintain it So my proposal is to decommission sonar.xwiki.org and to configure https://sonarcloud.io/organizations/xwiki/projects the way we want (I already did that a bit but we can tune it more) and modify our maven build to push to it. WDYT? Thanks -Vincent

6 9

[xwiki-devs] [Discussion] Coding practice for location of internal package name
by Vincent Massol 31 Dec '18

31 Dec '18

Hi devs, On Matrix/IRC, I’ve posted the following: " * Guillaume Delhumeau: BTW your naming is strange for the internal package * for ex: package org.xwiki.notifications.preferences.internal.email; * normally we put internal just after the main package part * ie. * org.xwiki.notifications.internal.* * and org.xwiki.notifications.* for public classes * see http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/CodeStyle/JavaCodeStyle/#HPac… * General rule is org.xwiki.(module name).internal. * I see thomas has done the same “error" for org.xwiki.job.handler.internal and org.xwiki.job.handler.internal.question . So maybe there's something to discuss/change * I guess we have a mix of both now so we should discuss it and adjust our rules if need be “ So I think we don’t have all the same rules/understanding of the definition at http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/CodeStyle/JavaCodeStyle/#HPac… I’d like to discuss with you to see what you prefer and adjust our rules so that it matches what we do in practice. Any take in this? Thanks -Vincent

7 8