3 Sep
2015
3 Sep
'15
12:02 p.m.
Hi Edy,
On 2 Sep 2015 at 20:08:29, Eduard Moraru
(enygma2002@gmail.com(mailto:enygma2002@gmail.com)) wrote:
Hi,
I get the feeling that we are overengineering it after a certain point.
Yes, you could argue that the really, really, really basic operations
should be in core and then the more elaborate operations can be included
when needed, etc. but let's be real, nobody wants, for example, the XWiki
version that only does create and view, but does not do copy + rename
because in their specific code they don`t use that. Also, nobody wants the
XWiki version that only works with a single document because they never
create more than 1 document, etc.
With nested spaces, the model has expanded and so did the operations on the
model. They are part of the model, whether we like it or not, and should be
bundled with the model itself. Like the wiki service, we have extended the
model, but to use it in the new way, you need to depend on an "optional"
module.
There are very many places where XWiki is too monolithic and we need to
break it apart and refactor, yes, I agree, but in these recent discussions
on the topic, I personally feel we are drifting in the wrong direction.
Just my personal feeling.
Yes I definitely agree with you if you consider XE. Now if you consider XWiki as a
development platform for developing collaborative web applications it’s more arguable. I’m
pretty sure some integrators would be interested in the ability to configure the menus for
example, even though this is not required for XE.
If we’re talking specifically about splitting the Refactoring module into 2 then I agree
that it’s probably overkill at this point. Now on this topic, I believe it’s important
that we discuss the alternative whenever we add a new module to the core (ie to
PackageMojo) and verify we do want that, because otherwise it’s very easy to go back to a
monolith (even though you’d have several modules it can still be a monolith if they all
depend on another ;)). We need to fight entropy (aka technical debt)! :)
If we’re talking specifically about having configurable menus I don’t think it’s
overkill.
If we’re talking specifically about implementing a menu UIX for the Delete Action yes I
agree it’s overkill. I was just stating what I believe is the canonical way of doing this.
Even though we may not want to do it for this case, I felt it was good to mention it since
we could and probably should do this in a few places (like in the Drawer for example). If
also know Ludovic and probably other users who customize XWiki a lot would like to have
more Extension Points and we’re lagging behind on this.
Thanks
-Vincent
Thanks,
Eduard
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 6:42 PM, vincent(a)massol.net
wrote:
>
>
> On 2 Sep 2015 at 14:49:26, Marius Dumitru Florea (
> mariusdumitru.florea@xwiki.com(mailto:mariusdumitru.florea@xwiki.com))
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Eduard Moraru wrote:
> > > I`m not very familiar with the refactoring module and its contents,
> but it
> > > feels wrong to have extensions have to depend on it and use it in
> order to
> > > achieve basic model (CRUD) operations.
> >
> > The low level / basic CRUD operations are in oldcore. The refactoring
> > module doesn't modify the database directly, it uses
> > XWiki#deleteDocument and XWiki#copyDocument from oldcore to implement
> > the refactorings. If you only need to delete a single document from
> > the database without any side effects then you can use the oldcore
> > API. If you want to delete an entire hierarchy or update the backlinks
> > on rename then you should use the refactoring API.
> >
> > The "issue" here is that the DeleteAction (located currently in
> > oldcore) uses the refactoring API in order to support deleting an
> > entire hierarchy. If the DeleteAction were a component outside of
> > oldcore then it could depend on the refactoring-default but currently
> > it can only depend on refactoring-api (to avoid circular dependency on
> > oldcore).
>
> Actually, even if the DeleteAction was located in a module/extension
> outside of oldcore, we would still need to decide if we want to bundle this
> action by default or not in a minimal wiki (i.e. is it a core extension).
> So far we’ve said that yes we need the Delete Action in an empty wiki.
>
> Instead, what we could do in the future is this:
> * Refactor the Page Menu to be made of Extension Points
> * Have a default Extension Point Provider for the Delete Action that
> simply implements Delete using XWiki#deleteDocument(). This would be part
> of core and be available in an empty wiki
> * Have a more elaborate Extension Provider for the Delete Action (that
> overrides the basic one) that uses the Refactoring module. This would be
> packaged in an optional extension (that we would bundle in our Flavors by
> default but that you wouldn’t get by default in a minimal empty wiki).
>
>
> I think that after we finish Nested Spaces coding, it would be nice that
> we start introducing and using more Extension Points (this is long overdue
> IMO). There are plenty of places where they would be useful. Yesterday for
> example I notice the hardcoding of the Wiki Index in core vm (drawer.vm)
> when an Extension Point in the Drawer would offer a better approach IMO. We
> should also discuss best practices for when using UIX vs XClass (see
> http://markmail.org/message/ojgmy7pljzwjq7vp).
>
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> > The default refactoring implementation is brought in by XE, but
> > functional tests in platform don't have it unless they add a
> > dependency, or we add it to the packager plugin as Vincent did.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Marius
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Eduard
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 6:54 PM, vincent(a)massol.net
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> Right now almost all func tests fail to delete pages when they
> > >> do getUtil().deletePage(…). They fail with:
> > >>
> > >> Caused by: org.xwiki.component.manager.ComponentLookupException:
Can't
> > >> find descriptor for the component [role = [interface
> org.xwiki.job.Job]
> > >> hint = [delete]]
> > >>
> > >> The reason is that since XWIKI-12268 the Delete action cannot work if
> the
> > >> Refactoring module isn't bundled, which makes the Refactoring
module
> a core
> > >> module. And this module is not part of the core modules ATM. I’ve
> added it
> > >> to the PackageMojo for now but we need to decide what to do.
> > >>
> > >> Personally I’ve always viewed Refactoring as optional and advanced
> > >> features.
> > >>
> > >> I don’t consider basic delete, basic copy and basic rename/move as
> > >> refactoring options. However there are some parts of them that are
> > >> refactorings. For example when Renaming, also check for wiki pages
> having
> > >> the renamed page as parent and updating them or updating wiki links
in
> > >> pages.
> > >>
> > >> So we need to decide if:
> > >>
> > >> * We consider the Refactoring module as core.
> > >> * Introduce a new module and move some of the core actions such as
> delete,
> > >> move, etc to it and keep the refactoring module for non-core
> refactoring
> > >> * Split the refactoring into basic refactorings and advanced ones.
> Have
> > >> basic delete, copy, rename + advanced options for them separately
> > >> * Others?
> > >>
> > >> WDYT?
> > >>
> > >> Still hesitating on my side.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks
> > >> -Vincent