[xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Enable xwiki/2.1 syntax by default in 2.6RC1
Hi, I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1. Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0. The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status. Here's my +1 WDYT? Thanks -Vincent
+1 Thanks, Marius On 11/02/2010 12:10 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+1 provided that it's shown in the syntax display name that this is still in an experimental state. On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne
On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
+1 provided that it's shown in the syntax display name that this is still in an experimental state.
It's already displayed like this thomas. Thanks -Vincent
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 14:58, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
+1 provided that it's shown in the syntax display name that this is still in an experimental state.
It's already displayed like this thomas.
Yes i know, it's more a reason why i vote +1 than a request
Thanks -Vincent
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne
+1 On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 15:58, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
+1 provided that it's shown in the syntax display name that this is still in an experimental state.
It's already displayed like this thomas.
Thanks -Vincent
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by
default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to
provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it
should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent
devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+1 Regards, Sorin B. On 11/02/2010 12:10 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On 11/02/2010 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Initially I was 0, but I've changed my mind to +1, since otherwise users won't be able to easily test the new features (icon URLs), and the syntax won't be tested enough. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
+1 as long as it's marked experimental. For the future, when the syntax is stable, what migration path do we offer ? An option to automatically migrate all 2.0 content to 2.1 ? Also when changing syntax in the panel, should we provide specific migrators to migrate a page from 1.0 directly to 2.1 like we do from 2.0 to 2.1 ? from 2.0 to 2.1 ? (this one probably is not needed) Jerome. On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Btw we should tag as "experimental" other features like the extension manager (beta is probably not the right naming actually), as well as user directory, etc. Gregory GUENEAU XWiki Chief Strategy Officer +33 6 07 01 70 65 [email protected] -from my iPad- On 2 nov. 2010, at 15:54, Jerome Velociter <[email protected]> wrote:
+1 as long as it's marked experimental.
For the future, when the syntax is stable, what migration path do we offer ? An option to automatically migrate all 2.0 content to 2.1 ?
Also when changing syntax in the panel, should we provide specific migrators to migrate a page from 1.0 directly to 2.1 like we do from 2.0 to 2.1 ? from 2.0 to 2.1 ? (this one probably is not needed)
Jerome.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 15:54, Jerome Velociter <[email protected]> wrote:
+1 as long as it's marked experimental.
For the future, when the syntax is stable, what migration path do we offer ? An option to automatically migrate all 2.0 content to 2.1 ?
Also when changing syntax in the panel, should we provide specific migrators to migrate a page from 1.0 directly to 2.1 like we do from 2.0 to 2.1 ? from 2.0 to 2.1 ? (this one probably is not needed)
There is no such thing as migrator from 1.0 to 2.0, you can convert any supported input syntax as any supported output syntax in the UI.
Jerome.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 9:56 PM, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 15:54, Jerome Velociter <[email protected]> wrote:
+1 as long as it's marked experimental.
For the future, when the syntax is stable, what migration path do we offer ? An option to automatically migrate all 2.0 content to 2.1 ?
Also when changing syntax in the panel, should we provide specific migrators to migrate a page from 1.0 directly to 2.1 like we do from 2.0 to 2.1 ? from 2.0 to 2.1 ? (this one probably is not needed)
There is no such thing as migrator from 1.0 to 2.0, you can convert any supported input syntax as any supported output syntax in the UI.
By migrator I meant converter. OK did not know the UI supported all syntaxes. Still at some point we might want to propose a "global" converter (so a "migrator" I guess) from 2.0 to 2.1, since the conversion should be rather safe. WDYT ?
Jerome.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+1 Thanks, Florin Ciubotaru On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+1, JV. On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+1 Denis On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 18:36, Jean-Vincent Drean <[email protected]>wrote:
+1,
JV.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
I'd like to include xwiki/2.1 in the list of available syntaxes by default for 2.6RC1.
Of course the default syntax remains xwiki/2.0.
The rationale is: * Get people to know it exist and try it out as early as possible to provide feedback
Note that it's marked (experimental) in the syntax combo box list so it should be enough to let people know about its status.
Here's my +1
WDYT?
Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO
participants (11)
-
Denis Gervalle -
Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) -
Florin Ciubotaru -
Gregory GUENEAU -
Jean-Vincent Drean -
Jerome Velociter -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Sorin Burjan -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol