30 Apr
2012
30 Apr
'12
2:58 p.m.
Hi,
I've now put the Event Renderer in its own syntax module, same as what we have for
other syntaxes.
Thus we need to decide if we still want to bundle it in XE or not (it was bundled but only
because it was in rendering-api before).
IMO there's no reason to bundle it at all since:
* it's not used anywhere
* I don't see any use case for it (we use it only for tests)
* We want to reduce the # of extensions we bundle by default
* It can be added by the user in his XE instance should he need it (I doubt it)
So here's my +1 to not bundle it and to add this potential backward compat breakage in
the RN for 4.1M1
Thanks
-Vincent
30 Apr
30 Apr
3:47 p.m.
+1
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi,
I've now put the Event Renderer in its own syntax module, same as what we have for
other syntaxes.
Thus we need to decide if we still want to bundle it in XE or not (it was bundled but
only because it was in rendering-api before).
IMO there's no reason to bundle it at all since:
* it's not used anywhere
* I don't see any use case for it (we use it only for tests)
* We want to reduce the # of extensions we bundle by default
* It can be added by the user in his XE instance should he need it (I doubt it)
So here's my +1 to not bundle it and to add this potential backward compat breakage
in the RN for 4.1M1
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
4:30 p.m.
On 04/30/2012 08:58 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi,
I've now put the Event Renderer in its own syntax module, same as what we have for
other syntaxes.
Thus we need to decide if we still want to bundle it in XE or not (it was bundled but
only because it was in rendering-api before).
IMO there's no reason to bundle it at all since:
* it's not used anywhere
* I don't see any use case for it (we use it only for tests)
* We want to reduce the # of extensions we bundle by default
* It can be added by the user in his XE instance should he need it (I doubt it)
So here's my +1 to not bundle it and to add this potential backward compat breakage
in the RN for 4.1M1
+1.
Going even further, in future versions should we bundle any syntax other
than the three xwiki/* syntaxes by default? Since syntaxes can be
installed using the extension manager, it would be simpler to disable
the configuration for "which syntaxes are enabled" and simply enable all
the syntaxes that have been installed.
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
2 May
2 May
11:14 a.m.
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 5:30 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <sergiu(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
On 04/30/2012 08:58 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
+1
Hi,
I've now put the Event Renderer in its own syntax module, same as what we
have for other syntaxes.
Thus we need to decide if we still want to bundle it in XE or not (it was
bundled but only because it was in rendering-api before).
IMO there's no reason to bundle it at all since:
* it's not used anywhere
* I don't see any use case for it (we use it only for tests)
* We want to reduce the # of extensions we bundle by default
* It can be added by the user in his XE instance should he need it (I
doubt it)
So here's my +1 to not bundle it and to add this potential backward compat
breakage in the RN for 4.1M1
+1.
Going even further, in future versions should we bundle any syntax other
than the three xwiki/* syntaxes by default? Since syntaxes can be installed
using the extension manager, it would be simpler to disable the
configuration for "which syntaxes are enabled" and simply enable all the
syntaxes that have been installed.
+1
Thanks,
Marius
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
12:13 p.m.
On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 4:30 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <sergiu(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
On 04/30/2012 08:58 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've now put the Event Renderer in its own syntax module, same as what we
> have for other syntaxes.
> Thus we need to decide if we still want to bundle it in XE or not (it was
> bundled but only because it was in rendering-api before).
>
> IMO there's no reason to bundle it at all since:
> * it's not used anywhere
> * I don't see any use case for it (we use it only for tests)
> * We want to reduce the # of extensions we bundle by default
> * It can be added by the user in his XE instance should he need it (I
> doubt it)
>
> So here's my +1 to not bundle it and to add this potential backward
> compat breakage in the RN for 4.1M1
>
>
+1
Going even further, in future versions should we bundle any syntax other
than the three xwiki/* syntaxes by default? Since syntaxes can be installed
using the extension manager, it would be simpler to disable the
configuration for "which syntaxes are enabled" and simply enable all the
syntaxes that have been installed.
+1
Thanks.
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO
4520
days inactive
4522
days old
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Denis Gervalle -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol