19 Mar
2015
19 Mar
'15
9:08 a.m.
Hi Caty,
See below.
On 18 Mar 2015 at 19:29:17, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
(valicac@gmail.com(mailto:valicac@gmail.com)) wrote:
Hi,
I want to write automated tests for some contrib applications, but I need
you help on some questions.
== Prb 1. Folder Structure + Changing IDs ==
Currently the majority of applications don't have modules.
You mean submodules I guess since they’re a module (maven module) themselves.
Also some applications have IDs that don't
correspond with the contrib
standard: sometimes wrong groupId like 'org.xwiki.contrib.forum', sometimes
random artifactId.
Why would ‘org.xwiki.contrib.forum’ be a wrong group id?
The rule is defined
here http://contrib.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#HHostingtools and a module can
have org.xwiki.contrib or org.xwiki.contrib.<shortprojetname>.
When wanting to change the groupId for
'org.xwiki.contrib.forum' I was told
that we should change it only if we have a very good reason, otherwise
changing the ID will resolve in upgrading problems within the Extension
Manager. Unfortunately I don't remember exactly the problem with the
changing of the ID, I just know I don't need to do it :) (//sorry Thomas)
We support relocation so the extension id (groupId+artifactId) can change. The only
negative effect is that XWiki will not propose an upgrade automatically when the new
version comes out with a new extensionId. (I’d love to brainstorm about finding ways to
handle this with Thomas though).
Example:
https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/application-forum
Theoretically, wanting to add tests I would need to create two modules:
- application-forum-test
- application-forum-ui, and move the current sources here.
Unfortunately this means a change in the ID.
Are 'adding tests' a good reason to change the ID?
Should I not change the ID, and just add a test module?
- application-forum-test
- src/main/resources
I’m in favor of changing the extension id and add relocation (it was done for this
purpose). This is what we did in xwiki-platform for a lot of modules.
== Prb 2. Naming standards ==
We have some conventions on contrib.xwiki.org about name of the project.
We should add maybe some more examples on groupId and artifactId.
Also when looking at the test modules names, some applications have:
- {{full-repository-name}}-tests
- {{full-repository-name}}-test
- {{partial-repository-name}}-test
- {{random-repository-name}}-test
- test
Where? AFAIK I’ve been the one doing most of the tests relocation in xwiki-platform and
our naming rule has always been the same. For example:
xwiki-platform-faq-test/
|_ xwiki-platform-faq-test-tests/
|_ …
Maybe we should agree also on this and document it.
I guess the correct name would be:
- {{full-repository-name}}-test
-- {{full-repository-name}}-test-pageobjects
-- {{full-repository-name}}-test-tests
- {{full-repository-name}}-ui
Yes. Some conventions are already documented here:
http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HBuildBe…
Also if we are 'discovering' some applications
that don't correspond to the
standard, do we change them or do we let them be? Since changing means a
change in the ID :P
I’d say we change them.
Since in theory we should have automated tests for all
our applications,
should we add a convention to always create a
- {{full-repository-name}}-ui ?
Yes. This is what I do when I create a new "top level" module.
Additional question: Also when we will transfer from
platform to contrib,
are we going to rename the modules?
I think we discussed this and we said we would change the id but not change the package
names for now to not break backward compat. Would need to read again the mail thread. In
any case we still have some decisions to make on that. I’ve been wanting to do this move
but first I wanted to implement the cleanup/removal of xwiki-enterprise to make way for
flavors.
Thanks
-Vincent