9 Oct
2012
9 Oct
'12
11:57 a.m.
On Oct 9, 2012, at 11:22 AM, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Yes, but I think they're linked because if we can't find a good name then
we're left with option 3).
Thanks
-Vincent
On Oct 9, 2012, at 11:09 AM, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
Of course but I wanted to keep the (display name) naming discussion separated. Hi devs,
In order to automate the update of extensions imported from
https://github.com/xwiki/ we need to have nothing to modify when an
import is done.
The last remaining thing is the name on which there is a debate is the
name. Right now the name we have in our maven project looks like
"XWiki Commons - Extension - Repository - Maven" so that's what we get
when importing this project or when viewing it in EM UI.
Some of us want to keep this idish name for Maven build but don't like
it when displaying extension. I recently introduced a way to overwrite
some extension related informations like the name based on properties.
So here are the choices we have:
1) Do nothing which mean display "XWiki Commons - Extension -
Repository - Maven" in EM UI and extensions.xwiki.org
2) Change our naming in Maven <name> property for it to be more a name
than an id that would looks good in EM UI
3) Keep the same naming for Maven <name> and overwrite it everywhere
using <xwiki.extension.name> property
So, WDYT ?
The one that makes the more sense to me is 2) so my +1 goes to this
one. Frankly I don't care too much having the current id based display
of the summary of built modules in Maven build and I personally won't
have any issue to know what name correspond to what project (but
that's because I know them well, I can understand new dev could be a
bit more lost).
Then:
* +0 for 3) to +0 (I don't like too much having this special case
everywhere in our Maven pom.xml)
* -0 for 1) (I agree that it does not looks very nice as a display name).
Exactly the same as Thomas for me. I'd really like if we could find a solution that
works for 2). Even in Maven it's supposed to be a name, i.e. something readable, not
an id… Now even with 2) we would still need a naming rule and have some concise name.