6 Apr
2010
6 Apr
'10
9:48 a.m.
On Apr 3, 2010, at 3:46 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Yes since they contain additional data, not common with other extension types.
On 04/02/2010 12:22 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Yes, I agree that we should store the DownloadClass objects in the same page.
Hi,
I'm implementing the mail entitled "[Proposal] Rationalize our projects and SVN
structure" and I need to start creating extensions.xwiki.org (a **first** version of
it).
Here's my current thinking re its structure:
* An ExtensionClass
- Description
- icon (optional)
- Download page (optional)
Why a distinct download page? I find it hard to manage it like this. - created by
- contributor
- bundled with (none, top level projects except contrib, extensions)
- content (with template having Tested With + Requirements sections)
- type (macro, snippet, application, plugin, skin, other)
* A MacroClass
- macro type
* A SnippetClass
- languages (multi choice list: script languages)
Macro and Snippet are added along the ExtensionClass? > Note: In the future we'll need to map these
classes to the Extension Manager descriptor, with dependencies for example.
>
> * Have an ExtensionClassSheet that does basically the same thing as now
> * Have an ExtensionClassTemplate with predefined sections to guide the author: Usage,
Installation& Requirements, Tested With (note: Installation& Requirements could
also be put in the Download page, common to all versions)
> * Keep the Download classes too for now
> * On the home page, have a big livetable mapped to ExtensionClass for now.
>
> * Put all extensions in an Extensions space
> * Use a prefix of "Extension"
> * When an extension is made of different "types", then bundle it as a zip
with type "other". For example the Watch extension is made of a XAR + 2 jars, it
would be bundled as a zip and a type of "other".
>
> * Move Module References to platform.xwiki.org
>
> * Possibly write some scripts to help migrate current content on code.xwiki.org to
extensions.xwiki.org
>
> WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent