Hi Murray, I think it's a valid point, we discussed it on the dev list but people migrating don't have to have readed it.. I've added a prominent section noting this at https://jspwiki-wiki.apache.org/Wiki.jsp?page=NewIn2.11
Also, the relevant key at jspwiki.properties is already stating the allowed values, see: https://github.com/apache/jspwiki/blob/master/jspwiki-main/src/main/resources/ini/jspwiki.properties#L292-L297 Originally, the default template folder was to be called haddock, to ease transitioning from 2.10. One of the advantages of having the haddock template as default is that you can create your template with only the files you want to modify. Those files will "override" the default template ones, whereas the rest will be readed from the default one. So you can create new templates by modifying a few files. Also, because of this, some files are expected to be on the default folder (they're hardcoded values on 210, and on java code), so keeping the haddock folder would mean having part of the template on one folder and the rest on another, plus we'd lose the ability of overwritting templates.. TLDR; given that we could break backwards compatibility, it was easier to have the haddock template folder renamed to default, as we thought it was prone to less errors than the alternatives. Hope is enough to make you reconsider the vote. best regards, juan pablo On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 9:27 PM Murray Altheim <murra...@altheim.com> wrote: > Hi all. > > > This is a release vote for Apache JSPWiki, version 2.11.0.M1. The vote > > will be open for at least 72 hours from now. > > -1. > > I've successfully built, installed and fired up a wiki based on 2.11.0.M1. > Everything works as it should. I was even able to do a one-liner change to > common-headers.jsp and get my own supplemental stylesheet to work nicely. > > I'm downvoting for one reason: any users (such as myself) who (mistakenly) > re-use their existing jspwiki-custom.properties file, or as I did, copy > my "custom" properties across to the new file, will get a template-less > result (a white page with the LeftMenu at the bottom of the screen and the > page-content even further down) if they neglect to set the template name > from 'haddock' to 'default' or leave the property commented-out. This might > flummox some admins and isn't a friendly behaviour. > > Perhaps when the template name in the property file fails JSPWiki should > fall back to the default template rather than fail outright? At very least > there should be a note in the change log indicating that 'haddock' no > longer works as a template name. > > This is kinda an edge case; I don't really want to downvote and delay > things > but this does seem like a minor bug. I'm open to changing my vote, BTW, > i.e., I'm easily convinced that a note in the change log would suffice, > more wanting to see how you folks feel about this. > > Cheers, > > Murray > > ........................................................................... > Murray Altheim <murray18 at altheim dot com> = = === > http://www.altheim.com/murray/ === > === > = = === > In the evening > The rice leaves in the garden > Rustle in the autumn wind > That blows through my reed hut. > -- Minamoto no Tsunenobu > > > >
