9 Jan
2012
9 Jan
'12
9:48 a.m.
On Jan 9, 2012, at 8:57 AM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
2012/1/8 Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net>
We've restructured are code base so that everything is platform. Platform contains
modules which are "features" (a.k.a extensions).
Right now we still have enterprise/ but it's only a packaging and it could possibly
even be removed in some future and replaced by a flavor.
I don't really know what lcms is doing but it's probably doing way too much for
being in the platform.
IMO the only way to include it in platform is to split it in smaller modules each with a
specific purpose (feature), so that each module can be used in a running XE to add a
feature.
Now this would put a lot of work on the hands of the xwiki dev team (ownership,
maintenance, quality control, etc) which is why this decision would require a careful VOTE
and for me it would require to start in xwiki-contrib as separate modules there and then
with pull requests to incorporate them one by one in platform.
On Jan 7, 2012, at 5:49 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
It does make fully sense to me what you are saying. I'm not sure xwiki-lcms
is a piece as platform as it's a subset for a specific need. The
requirements you are giving are specific to platform for some of them.
There could be an intermediary way, where a project can exist outside of
contrib, be under the XWiki organization umbrella, and not be in platform. On 01/07/2012 06:15 AM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As there are now more projects using the Curriki Distribution, in the
> Curriki mailing list we have voted for the following changes for the
> Curriki Project:
>
> * Rename the main project xwiki-learning-cms
> * Call the core: xwiki-learning-cms-core:
>
http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/xwiki-learning-cms/xwiki-learning-cms-co…
> * Call the curriki specific code : curriki:
> http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/xwiki-learning-cms/curriki
> * Call the planete sankoré specific code : sankore:
> http://svn.xwiki.org/svnroot/xwiki/xwiki-learning-cms/sankore
>
> The curriki 1.8 branches would go into the curriki area, except for the
> latest branch which would be duplicated in xwiki-kearning-cms-core as
the
> 1.0 branch
> The 2.x branches would go into xwiki-learning-cms-core
>
> We would then publish the sankore core to the repository.
> As you can see these plans are based on SVN. A separate discussion is
> undergoing to see if we can easily move to GitHub.
>
> In this case we would ask for one or more repositories in the
xwiki-contrib
> area. It's not clear to me in this case
if we should use only one or 3
> different repositories. I tend to think it should be 3.
The # of repositories mainly depend on the release cycles. If you consider
them 3 different projects with different release cycles, I think 3 repos
make more sense.
> Finally we would rename curriki.xwiki.org
into lcms.xwiki.org.
>
> We're asking the goahead from the XWiki commiters to make these changes.
>
> Here's my +1
Non binding +1 from me (since I'm not a committer on the curriki project).
It would be great that the curriki/sankore/lcms projects move to GitHub in
a not too distant future.
Here's my not so relevant +1, I didn't
interact much with this area of
XWiki, but I welcome the extraction of a more
generic core on which
projects like Curriki and Sankore are built.
For the GitHub discussion, I agree that three repositories would be
better, but
I'm not sure xwiki-contrib is the best home. On SVN it was a
top level directory, not one inside contrib, so we could make it part of
the xwiki organization. Plus, these projects are big enough not to be
considered mere contributions. On the other hand, it is not something
maintained by the XWiki committers, so we might not want to send the wrong
message: "it's a project maintained by the XWiki organization". So a third
option would be to create a new organization for it, since it's free. I'm
no voting on this point, since I don't have a strong preference, I'll let
others decide.
Here's my POV regarding xwiki vs xwiki-contrib:
* Everything in the xwiki main repository is coded and maintained by the
XWiki development team according to the XWiki development practices defined
at http://dev.xwiki.org
* Curriki doesn't fit with this
* In order to allow easy contributions to develop projects around the
XWiki project we've created a xwiki-contrib project/organization with the
rules defined at http://contrib.xwiki.org.
* To repeat those rules:
** projects in xwiki-contrib can be developed by anyone (no need to be
committer on the main xwiki project) and following any methodology (no need
to follow the http://dev.xwiki.org methodology)
** xwiki-contrib is NOT an incubator. It's a final location for small to
large projects. Projects which start small there stay as xwiki-contrib
projects even they grow very large.
** projects in xwiki-contrib start with shared resources (shared wiki on
extensions.xwiki.org, shared jira project on jira.wiki.org, shared
mailing list using the user/dev mailing list of the main xwiki projects,
shared maven groupid, etc
** projects in xwiki-contrib can have their own dedicated resources when
they grow larger (own wiki, own mailing list, own jira, own maven groupid,
etc)
** This is all documented already on http://contrib.xwiki.org
So to summarize, for me the difference between a project in the "xwiki"
organization vs a project in the "xwiki-contrib" organization is purely
based on the development team and on the development practices followed
Now what are the options for Curriki/Sankore/LCMS…
Option 1: Join XWiki Platform
=======================
Now there could be a VOTE to include lcms into xwiki platform but that's a
separate discussion and for this to happen, the current curriki developers
would need to:
* agree to fully follow the dev practices defined at dev.xwiki.org,
including release practices of course
* agree to become platform committers, i.e. participate to all
VOTE/proposals and in general development of XWiki platform
* be voted individually as an XWiki committer
* follow some incubation process to ensure that the points above are done
well
AFAICS there's no wish ATM from the curriki developers to do any of that.
The LCMS project is a good example.
This could apply to more "mature" projects.
This is what Sergiu and me were saying (what you call "space" is called an
"organization" in GitHub) but as I said above I don't think this the best
approach. We should start with what we have and see why it doesn't work and we need
something different.
Option 2: Join XWiki-Contrib
======================
This means making Curriki/Sankore and LCMS xwiki-contrib projects. This
doesn't change much at all.
Right now xwiki-contrib projects are supposed to be hosted on GitHub but
we could make an exception and since we allow successful xwiki-contrib
projects to have their own resources we could amend contrib.xwiki.org to
also allow large contrib projects to have their own organizations on
github. That said I'd be tempted to keep them in the xwiki-contrib org for
now, I don't really see any issue with that.
For me option 2 is clearly the best ATM.
This or create another space on github which would receive the LCMS
projects, while still keeping it in the "Contrib" area of XWiki
contributions. Since you allow to use different repositories this
could
have the advantage of showing 3 repositories inside for the lcms-core,
sankore and currikiorg, giving the needed flexibility and making it more
clear where the education oriented contributions are.
Disadvantage of this solution would be to show "less" activity as the
xwiki-contrib area has a lot of XWiki activity which would show more
activity in the education space. I'll bring it up in the curriki-devs
mailing list (which we would rename).
Yep, it also makes it harder to manage since we need more documentation to explain this
exception, more administration and a dispersal of contrib resources.
With 3 repos I don't think it would outfit xwiki-contrib. If you have 10 or 20 repos
then yes I would agree.
This is also linked with the idea I put above to start separating lcms into smaller
general purpose modules which could then be integrated in the Platform (if voted and
agreed of course - they'd need to be generic enough).
Thanks
-Vincent
Ludovic
> WDYT?
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent