21 Mar
2015
21 Mar
'15
2:58 a.m.
+1 to remove it since we did not really use it in the end.
<thread-highjacking>
Side note: Re XClasses in UI modules, I am beginning more and more to think
that we need to use a new convention that is additional to -ui and -api
packages which should be targeted at an extension's model when it involves
XClasses. Mentioning this because XClasses are not really UI and are needed
really by the -api modules more than the -ui modules. Also, there are a lot
of cases when an extension X depends on extension Y-api, but that extension
also has XClasses defined in its Y-ui module which would force extension X
to actually depend on Y-ui which is not right IMO. Perhaps this deserves a
thread of its own.
Side note2: Re mandatory classes defined in Java, I am really more in favor
of XClasses defined in XMLs instead of java (since most of the time the
java classes are non-conditional, i.e. the properties we add do not depend
on certain conditions so they can easily be replaced by a static XML), all
we need is to add a new meta-property to a class that defines it as
mandatory. Again, perhaps a separate thread.
</thread-highjacking>
Thanks,
Eduard
On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 12:57 PM, vincent(a)massol.net <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
Hi devs,
In xwiki-enteprise we have XWiki.RequiredRightClass. We’ve started
discussing it in the past in the “Split XE pages” mail thread and I’d like
to move forward.
So we need to decide what to do about it. Several options:
* We discussed moving it to xwiki-platform-administration but it shouldn’t
go there IMO since we’re trying to make this module almost empty (just
providing the extension points mechanism) and have admin features
dispatched in the modules providing them. Also it would mean forcing
unnecessary dependencies on xwiki-platform-administration from several
modules (6-7 right now).
* It could go in a new xwiki-platform-security-ui module.
* It could be moved to Java but we don’t have a clear policy nor decision
if we want to favor xclasses written in java or opposite, decide that we
don’t want that and move away from XClasses in Java. So we’d need to decide
this first.
* We could also simply remove it! Rationale:
** I don’t think we’re using that information much and its need is
supposed to go away once signed scripts is there
** There’s no way to force pages requiring PR to add such an XObject and
thus it’s not done consistently
** We don’t even have a page listing all pages requiring PR and even if we
had one I’m not exactly what it would bring. I guess the idea was to make
it simpler to install/upgrade XWiki but we’ve fixed this already in the
Wiki Creation Wizard for example so the need is less now.
So overall I’m more in favor of dropping this experiment which IMO wasn’t
very successful.
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs