Hi, +1 for enabled by default while being skippable if needed. Thanks, Clément On 07/31/2018 06:52 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:

+1

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Adel Atallah <[email protected]> wrote:

...

+1 enabled by default, obviously.

Le mar. 31 juil. 2018 18:43, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> a écrit :

...

Hi, devs.

We have had 2 previous discussions on this topic: * July 2016 (discussion): https://markmail.org/thread/oodciq7pv6pj7eic * Jan 2018 (proposal): https://markmail.org/thread/ymwsebvr3k7voy3p

And we have at least 2 issues on this topic: * Oct 2011: XWIKI-7058 <http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-7058>: Page creation date should be the date of the installation * Feb 2015: XCOMMONS-1447 <https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XCOMMONS-1447>: XAR plugin should replace the dates with a common number

TL;DR: It's causing confusion for our users to install pages that are created in 2005/2009/etc. so we should avoid committing dates on git that users might end up installing.

Reminder: Importing a document with empty dates will: * Use the current date if the document is new (i.e. does not exist in the wiki) * Use the existing dates if the document already exists in the wiki, if using backup import * Use the current user and current date for the document update date, if imported using non-backup import of EM extension install

Adel and myself have extended the xar:verify and xar:format goals of the xar plugin to check for the existence of date fields in the XML wiki pages and to remove them. The fields are: * date * contentUpdateDate * creationDate * attachment/date

See the PR https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-commons/pull/44/

This check (on both verify and format goals) is skippable entirely with the "xar.dates.skip property" (default to false) or "xar.dates.skip.documentList" for individual documents (list of doc references).

I need your vote for accepting the existing PR and for removing the document dates (e.g. https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/pull/792) and your feedback in case you know of any problems that this might create.

Also, please mention if you would prefer for this behavior to be skipped by default (and explicitly enabled on XWiki Standard, so that 3rd party code is not impacted by this change).

Here's my +1 (enabled by default and skippable if needed).

Thanks, Eduard

Hi, +1 for enabled by default while being skippable if needed. Thanks, Alex On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) <[email protected]

wrote:

+1 I would like to not have pages since 2005 anymore, hope everything else will be ok

Thanks, Caty

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 9:11 PM Clément Aubin <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi,

+1 for enabled by default while being skippable if needed.

Thanks, Clément

On 07/31/2018 06:52 PM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:

...

+1

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Adel Atallah <[email protected]> wrote:

...

+1 enabled by default, obviously.

Le mar. 31 juil. 2018 18:43, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> a écrit :

...

Hi, devs.

We have had 2 previous discussions on this topic: * July 2016 (discussion): https://markmail.org/thread/ oodciq7pv6pj7eic * Jan 2018 (proposal): https://markmail.org/thread/ymwsebvr3k7voy3p

And we have at least 2 issues on this topic: * Oct 2011: XWIKI-7058 <http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-7058>: Page creation date should be the date of the installation * Feb 2015: XCOMMONS-1447 <https://jira.xwiki.org/ browse/XCOMMONS-1447 : XAR plugin should replace the dates with a common number

TL;DR: It's causing confusion for our users to install pages that are created in 2005/2009/etc. so we should avoid committing dates on git that users might end up installing.

Reminder: Importing a document with empty dates will: * Use the current date if the document is new (i.e. does not exist in the wiki) * Use the existing dates if the document already exists in the wiki, if using backup import * Use the current user and current date for the document update date, if imported using non-backup import of EM extension install

Adel and myself have extended the xar:verify and xar:format goals of the xar plugin to check for the existence of date fields in the XML wiki pages and to remove them. The fields are: * date * contentUpdateDate * creationDate * attachment/date

See the PR https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-commons/pull/44/

This check (on both verify and format goals) is skippable entirely with the "xar.dates.skip property" (default to false) or "xar.dates.skip.documentList" for individual documents (list of doc references).

I need your vote for accepting the existing PR and for removing the document dates (e.g. https://github.com/xwiki/ xwiki-platform/pull/792) and your feedback in case you know of any problems that this might create.

Also, please mention if you would prefer for this behavior to be skipped by default (and explicitly enabled on XWiki Standard, so that 3rd party code is not impacted by this change).

Here's my +1 (enabled by default and skippable if needed).

Thanks, Eduard

+1 2018-08-07 10:48 GMT+02:00 Marius Dumitru Florea < [email protected]>:

+1

Thanks, Marius

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:43 PM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi, devs.

We have had 2 previous discussions on this topic: * July 2016 (discussion): https://markmail.org/thread/oodciq7pv6pj7eic * Jan 2018 (proposal): https://markmail.org/thread/ymwsebvr3k7voy3p

And we have at least 2 issues on this topic: * Oct 2011: XWIKI-7058 <http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-7058>: Page creation date should be the date of the installation * Feb 2015: XCOMMONS-1447 <https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XCOMMONS-1447>: XAR plugin should replace the dates with a common number

TL;DR: It's causing confusion for our users to install pages that are created in 2005/2009/etc. so we should avoid committing dates on git that users might end up installing.

Reminder: Importing a document with empty dates will: * Use the current date if the document is new (i.e. does not exist in the wiki) * Use the existing dates if the document already exists in the wiki, if using backup import * Use the current user and current date for the document update date, if imported using non-backup import of EM extension install

Adel and myself have extended the xar:verify and xar:format goals of the xar plugin to check for the existence of date fields in the XML wiki pages and to remove them. The fields are: * date * contentUpdateDate * creationDate * attachment/date

See the PR https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-commons/pull/44/

This check (on both verify and format goals) is skippable entirely with the "xar.dates.skip property" (default to false) or "xar.dates.skip.documentList" for individual documents (list of doc references).

I need your vote for accepting the existing PR and for removing the document dates (e.g. https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/pull/792) and your feedback in case you know of any problems that this might create.

Also, please mention if you would prefer for this behavior to be skipped by default (and explicitly enabled on XWiki Standard, so that 3rd party code is not impacted by this change).

Here's my +1 (enabled by default and skippable if needed).

Thanks, Eduard

-- Guillaume Delhumeau ([email protected]) Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS Committer on the XWiki.org project

Also, xar:format was executed at xwiki-platform level, in order for the build not to fail. https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/commit/053f0a2757cea18a5916632a58c60... https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/commit/324c033cccdfe90074089e906e396... All other projects/extensions outside platform will have to execute a xar:format on their own, at least once, after they upgrade to the new xar plugin version. Of course, the behavior can be also skipped, if needed, with details in https://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/XARPlugin. Thanks, Eduard On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 6:40 PM Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:

Thanks for your votes.

No -1s. The vote has passed.

Done in https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XCOMMONS-1447 and updated https://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/CodeStyle/XWikiXMLFilesCodeSt... .

Thanks, Eduard

On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 11:04 AM Guillaume Delhumeau < [email protected]> wrote:

...

+1

2018-08-07 10:48 GMT+02:00 Marius Dumitru Florea < [email protected]>:

...

+1

Thanks, Marius

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:43 PM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:

...

Hi, devs.

We have had 2 previous discussions on this topic: * July 2016 (discussion): https://markmail.org/thread/oodciq7pv6pj7eic * Jan 2018 (proposal): https://markmail.org/thread/ymwsebvr3k7voy3p

And we have at least 2 issues on this topic: * Oct 2011: XWIKI-7058 <http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-7058>: Page creation date should be the date of the installation * Feb 2015: XCOMMONS-1447 < https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XCOMMONS-1447>: XAR plugin should replace the dates with a common number

TL;DR: It's causing confusion for our users to install pages that are created in 2005/2009/etc. so we should avoid committing dates on git that users might end up installing.

Reminder: Importing a document with empty dates will: * Use the current date if the document is new (i.e. does not exist in the wiki) * Use the existing dates if the document already exists in the wiki, if using backup import * Use the current user and current date for the document update date, if imported using non-backup import of EM extension install

Adel and myself have extended the xar:verify and xar:format goals of the xar plugin to check for the existence of date fields in the XML wiki pages and to remove them. The fields are: * date * contentUpdateDate * creationDate * attachment/date

See the PR https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-commons/pull/44/

This check (on both verify and format goals) is skippable entirely with the "xar.dates.skip property" (default to false) or "xar.dates.skip.documentList" for individual documents (list of doc references).

I need your vote for accepting the existing PR and for removing the document dates (e.g. https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-platform/pull/792 ) and your feedback in case you know of any problems that this might create.

Also, please mention if you would prefer for this behavior to be skipped by default (and explicitly enabled on XWiki Standard, so that 3rd party code is not impacted by this change).

Here's my +1 (enabled by default and skippable if needed).

Thanks, Eduard

-- Guillaume Delhumeau ([email protected]) Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS Committer on the XWiki.org project