[xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Remove the ancient wikiwiki rendering engine from the platform
Hi devs, Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time. One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest. The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions? -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:51 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
+1 if keeping support for {pre} is not very complicated. Thanks, Marius
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions? -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
Hi what would be good to do is provide à script that would detect syntax 1.0 docs in a xem. I'm pretty sure there is still significant 1.0 code around. Even at XWiki SAS we have still a lot on our own xem We could have an option to load it on demand but have that option off by default Ludovic Envoyé de mon iPhone Le 7 juin 2012 à 00:51, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> a écrit :
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions? -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On 06/07/2012 02:28 AM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
Hi what would be good to do is provide à script that would detect syntax 1.0 docs in a xem.
I'm pretty sure there is still significant 1.0 code around. Even at XWiki SAS we have still a lot on our own xem
This isn't about the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but about the even older wikiwiki syntax. Here's a summary: This is =code formatting= This is *bold formatting* This is _italic formatting_ This is __bold and italic formatting__ * List item * but sublists are indented with groups of three spaces * so this is a third level list item Links are created by Space.CamelCase words, or just CamelCase words The xwiki/1.0 rendering engine will remain in place for the moment.
We could have an option to load it on demand but have that option off by default
Ludovic
Envoyé de mon iPhone
Le 7 juin 2012 à 00:51, Sergiu Dumitriu<[email protected]> a écrit :
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions?
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
Waooo, Don't even remember coding this one.. Must have been an initial experiment before downloading radeox and including it. Sure +1 to remove that code Ludovic 2012/6/7 Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]>:
On 06/07/2012 02:28 AM, Ludovic Dubost wrote:
Hi what would be good to do is provide à script that would detect syntax 1.0 docs in a xem.
I'm pretty sure there is still significant 1.0 code around. Even at XWiki SAS we have still a lot on our own xem
This isn't about the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but about the even older wikiwiki syntax. Here's a summary:
This is =code formatting= This is *bold formatting* This is _italic formatting_ This is __bold and italic formatting__ * List item * but sublists are indented with groups of three spaces * so this is a third level list item Links are created by Space.CamelCase words, or just CamelCase words
The xwiki/1.0 rendering engine will remain in place for the moment.
We could have an option to load it on demand but have that option off by default
Ludovic
Envoyé de mon iPhone
Le 7 juin 2012 à 00:51, Sergiu Dumitriu<[email protected]> a écrit :
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions?
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
-- Ludovic Dubost Founder and CEO Blog: http://blog.ludovic.org/ XWiki: http://www.xwiki.com Skype: ldubost GTalk: ldubost
+1 Best Regards, /Andreas 2012-06-07 00:51, Sergiu Dumitriu skrev:
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions?
Hi Sergiu, On Jun 7, 2012, at 12:51 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions?
+1 but there's the risk of introducing errors in our rewritten pre support so we would need to be careful. <off thread> I'd personally like to go further and remove the oldcore xwiki syntax 1.0 part completely and move it to legacy modules (which means still available for our end users). List of what would need to be done before we can move it to legacy: - Some cleanup to use the new velocity module in a few places instead of the old rendering for interpretText. I can think of templates and translations. There are probably more places. - Move our 21 pages from the stats app to xwiki/2.1 syntax - Move XWiki.OfficeImporter and XWiki.WatchListMessage to xwiki/2.1 syntax - anything else? </off thread> Thanks -Vincent
On Jun 7, 2012, at 9:24 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi Sergiu,
On Jun 7, 2012, at 12:51 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions?
+1 but there's the risk of introducing errors in our rewritten pre support so we would need to be careful.
Forgot to ask: can it be moved to legacy? Thanks -Vincent
<off thread> I'd personally like to go further and remove the oldcore xwiki syntax 1.0 part completely and move it to legacy modules (which means still available for our end users).
List of what would need to be done before we can move it to legacy: - Some cleanup to use the new velocity module in a few places instead of the old rendering for interpretText. I can think of templates and translations. There are probably more places. - Move our 21 pages from the stats app to xwiki/2.1 syntax - Move XWiki.OfficeImporter and XWiki.WatchListMessage to xwiki/2.1 syntax - anything else? </off thread>
Thanks -Vincent
On 06/07/2012 03:25 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Jun 7, 2012, at 9:24 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi Sergiu,
On Jun 7, 2012, at 12:51 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions?
+1 but there's the risk of introducing errors in our rewritten pre support so we would need to be careful.
Forgot to ask: can it be moved to legacy?
It could, but with great effort. That one is referenced from inside com.xpn.xwiki.render.DefaultXWikiRenderingEngine.DefaultXWikiRenderingEngine(XWiki, XWikiContext) in a long if-else chain. I'm not sure if the effort is really worth.
Thanks -Vincent
<off thread> I'd personally like to go further and remove the oldcore xwiki syntax 1.0 part completely and move it to legacy modules (which means still available for our end users).
List of what would need to be done before we can move it to legacy: - Some cleanup to use the new velocity module in a few places instead of the old rendering for interpretText. I can think of templates and translations. There are probably more places. - Move our 21 pages from the stats app to xwiki/2.1 syntax - Move XWiki.OfficeImporter and XWiki.WatchListMessage to xwiki/2.1 syntax - anything else? </off thread>
Thanks -Vincent
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions?
I was using XWiki since 0.9.x and I have never know about this. So +1 if there is no impact on 1.0 syntax.
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ ______________________________**_________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/**mailman/listinfo/devs<http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs>
-- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO
Big +1 to remove that, I never known we had this syntax and I'm sure nobody use it. On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 12:51 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions? -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne
Sergiu, I think this is the first "deprecation removal" I'd be able to give a +1 to! +1 ! I agree with Vincent that fiddling with {pre} is likely to give bad surprises but, to be frank, it has never ever been fully understandable to me. So maybe this would be the occasion! (the change of velocity from 1.5 to 1.7 is waaaaaaay more radical a change!) paul Le 7 juin 2012 à 00:51, Sergiu Dumitriu a écrit :
Hi devs,
Most of the devs know about the new xwiki-rendering engine which provides the support for the new xwiki/2.x syntaxes, and the old Radeox-based rendering engine which provides support for the xwiki/1.0 syntax, but I wonder who knows about the Oro-based wikiwiki engine that provides support for an even older undocumented wiki syntax? That one has been in the oldcore sources before I came in contact with XWiki, and it has been disabled for a very long time.
One thing that we still use from that basic rendering engine is the support for {pre}{/pre} code escaping, and that one will have to be preserved even if we remove all the rest.
The advantages of removing it include: - less ancient, unused, buggy code -- thus slightly less PermGen memory required and faster startup - one less Oro dependency (a long term goal is to remove Oro and ECS from our dependencies) - fewer WTFs from people stumbling over that code
Does anybody know of any users of that syntax? Is anybody still running 0.1.x versions? -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
participants (8)
-
Andreas Jonsson -
Denis Gervalle -
Ludovic Dubost -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Paul Libbrecht -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol