Hi guys, regarding the bug from http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XPXARPLUGIN, I would like to know your oppinion regarding this issue: If there is already a package.xml document, but it's invalid, the plugin should: a) Display a warning, ignore the existing package.xml and generate a new one. b) Throw an error, thus causing the build to fail Personally, I'm for a), since it's not a critical issue. Thomas M. says that if there is a package.xml it's because someone wants that package.xml to be taken into account, so if for b) Tnx.
[email protected] wrote:
Hi guys, regarding the bug from http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XPXARPLUGIN, I would like to know your oppinion regarding this issue: If there is already a package.xml document, but it's invalid, the plugin should: a) Display a warning, ignore the existing package.xml and generate a new one. b) Throw an error, thus causing the build to fail
Personally, I'm for a), since it's not a critical issue. Thomas M. says that if there is a package.xml it's because someone wants that package.xml to be taken into account, so if for b)
Since there are two opinions, why not make a (boolean) setting? The default should be to fail, but give the user the choice to force the build. Personally, I think that B is the right choice. An invalid xml file is a problem in the sources, and the developer should be aware of it. A mere warning could be lost in a long log, or in case of automated builds it will rarely be looked at. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:42 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
[email protected] wrote:
Hi guys, regarding the bug from http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XPXARPLUGIN, I would like to know your oppinion regarding this issue: If there is already a package.xml document, but it's invalid, the plugin should: a) Display a warning, ignore the existing package.xml and generate a new one. b) Throw an error, thus causing the build to fail
Personally, I'm for a), since it's not a critical issue. Thomas M. says that if there is a package.xml it's because someone wants that package.xml to be taken into account, so if for b)
Since there are two opinions, why not make a (boolean) setting? The default should be to fail, but give the user the choice to force the build.
Personally, I think that B is the right choice. An invalid xml file is a problem in the sources, and the developer should be aware of it. A mere warning could be lost in a long log, or in case of automated builds it will rarely be looked at.
+0 for configurable if it's "faill=true" by default.
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Thomas Mortagne
Thomas Mortagne wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:42 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
[email protected] wrote:
Hi guys, regarding the bug from http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XPXARPLUGIN, I would like to know your oppinion regarding this issue: If there is already a package.xml document, but it's invalid, the plugin should: a) Display a warning, ignore the existing package.xml and generate a new one. b) Throw an error, thus causing the build to fail
Personally, I'm for a), since it's not a critical issue. Thomas M. says that if there is a package.xml it's because someone wants that package.xml to be taken into account, so if for b) Since there are two opinions, why not make a (boolean) setting? The default should be to fail, but give the user the choice to force the build.
Personally, I think that B is the right choice. An invalid xml file is a problem in the sources, and the developer should be aware of it. A mere warning could be lost in a long log, or in case of automated builds it will rarely be looked at.
+0 for configurable if it's "faill=true" by default. +0 as well, it does not cost much
-- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
On Oct 17, 2008, at 11:22 AM, Jerome Velociter wrote:
Thomas Mortagne wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 2:42 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
[email protected] wrote:
Hi guys, regarding the bug from http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XPXARPLUGIN, I would like to know your oppinion regarding this issue: If there is already a package.xml document, but it's invalid, the plugin should: a) Display a warning, ignore the existing package.xml and generate a new one. b) Throw an error, thus causing the build to fail
Personally, I'm for a), since it's not a critical issue. Thomas M. says that if there is a package.xml it's because someone wants that package.xml to be taken into account, so if for b) Since there are two opinions, why not make a (boolean) setting? The default should be to fail, but give the user the choice to force the build.
Personally, I think that B is the right choice. An invalid xml file is a problem in the sources, and the developer should be aware of it. A mere warning could be lost in a long log, or in case of automated builds it will rarely be looked at.
+0 for configurable if it's "faill=true" by default. +0 as well, it does not cost much
I don't agree. +1 for b), -1 for having both. Complexity is bad especially when it's not needed. Thanks -Vincent
I'm in favor of b), giving the developer the responsibility of having a valid package.xml if he is willing to use one. Jerome. [email protected] wrote:
Hi guys, regarding the bug from http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XPXARPLUGIN, I would like to know your oppinion regarding this issue: If there is already a package.xml document, but it's invalid, the plugin should: a) Display a warning, ignore the existing package.xml and generate a new one. b) Throw an error, thus causing the build to fail
Personally, I'm for a), since it's not a critical issue. Thomas M. says that if there is a package.xml it's because someone wants that package.xml to be taken into account, so if for b)
Tnx.
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
+1 for b) [email protected] wrote:
Hi guys, regarding the bug from http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XPXARPLUGIN, I would like to know your oppinion regarding this issue: If there is already a package.xml document, but it's invalid, the plugin should: a) Display a warning, ignore the existing package.xml and generate a new one. b) Throw an error, thus causing the build to fail
Personally, I'm for a), since it's not a critical issue. Thomas M. says that if there is a package.xml it's because someone wants that package.xml to be taken into account, so if for b)
Tnx.
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
participants (6)
-
dan.miron＠xwiki.com -
Jerome Velociter -
Marius Dumitru Florea -
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Thomas Mortagne -
Vincent Massol