Re: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Upgrades for the 4.x cycle

Nothing about javascript? paul

Le 4 févr. 2012 à 00:49, Sergiu Dumitriu a écrit : > Hi devs, > > I'd like to have an early decision on what (bigger) dependencies should be upgraded in the next release cycle. > > A) HTML 5. Already proposed by Jerome. This is something that has a continuous aspect, since "switching to HTML5" can be something as simple as writing a smaller DOCTYPE, or can go to rewriting the entire templates and rendering engine. We'll start small and improve things as we go. > > B) Hibernate 4. Will require some code changes since we're using a few deprecated APIs that have been removed in 4.0. > > C) Struts 2. We could move away from Struts completely at some point, but until we have the time to implement our own action mechanism, a good step forward is upgrading to a newer version of Struts. > > D) Velocity Tools 2. I'm not quite happy with how version 2.0 is packaged, since it brings in a dependency on Struts 2, but 2.1 isn't planned yet. Alternatively, we could package our own subset of velotools, since we're only using the generic tools, not VelocityView or VelocityStruts. > > E) Servlets 3.0. Since we're using Java 1.6, we could also require a servlet-3.0 capable container. This will give us more flexibility in defining servlets and filters, since the 2.4 versions we're using now requires a central web.xml file. The problem is that only the most recent versions of the popular servlet containers are compatible: Jetty 8, Tomcat 7, Glassfish 3, WebSphere 8, WebLogic 12. Oracle Application Server doesn't provide a version compatible with servlets 3.0, but this server is discontinued anyway. This means that users on older Linux server versions will have to install Tomcat 7 manually. > > F) Jetty 8. This is required for Servlets 3.0, but it would be a good upgrade on its own. > > G) HSQLDB 2. Better for performance. > > H) Lucene 3.5, Tika 1.0. Upgrading Lucene shouldn't be a problem, but an early attempt at using Tika 1.0 didn't work, it would require some time to debug it. > > I). Sass, Less or something like that. Personally I'm against this, since we're already providing support for most of their benefits by including Velocity code in CSS files. Does anybody else consider that we should include a CSS framework? > > J) Joda Time 2 and Quartz 2, and maybe freshen up the plugins that use them. > > WDYT?