On Jul 10, 2013, at 2:39 PM, "Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)"
<valicac(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I also looked for new features since 2.4, but I've
used JIRA for this and
filtered on the issue type.
Sure but that's not really my point. That was just what got me thinking :)
Any feedback on the idea below?
Thanks
-Vincent
Thanks,
Caty
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> Today I needed to see all the features that were added since XWiki 2.4 and
> that got me thinking about how to document new feature or improvements on
>
xwiki.org.
>
> I started imagining the following:
>
> * To have an xclass representing an improvement or feature, with several
> properties:
> - the version in which the feature or improvement was added
> - whether it's an improvement or a feature
> - the description of the improvement or feature (textarea), in wiki syntax
>
> * On a given page, add as many xobjects that there are features or
> improvements
> * Create a wiki macro to include the xobject's content in the page content
> so that the user can see it when viewing the page
>
> Pros:
> * This would allow to be able to query the full wiki to see all the
> features/improvements added in a given version
> * This would allow to auto generate the release notes :) We wouldn't need
> to duplicate the content in both the release notes and in the reference
> document.
> * This would allow to automatically add some "new" icons when the version
> corresponding to the improvement/new feature is newer than the baseline
> version (for example, if we're developing version N we can say that on
>
xwiki.org we consider a feature/improvement to be "new" when its
> corresponding version is >= N-2)
>
> Cons:
> * A lot of work to convert the existing
xwiki.org content to this but we
> don't need to do that upfront. We can start by agreeing that any new
> feature/improvement would go through this mechanism for example.
> * A bit more complex to add new content for users but this mechanism
> doesn't preclude using the current way (ie unstructured content) as it'll
> still work.
>
> WDYT? Do you think this could be useful?
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent