Almost everybody has voted so I think this proposal is approved.
2013/9/13 Sergiu Dumitriu <ser...@xwiki.com> > On 09/13/2013 08:51 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <ser...@xwiki.com> > wrote: > >> On 09/11/2013 05:58 AM, Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau wrote: > >>> Since Enterprise embeds Workspaces by default since 5.2-m2, I think it > does > >>> not make any sense to release XWiki Manager (XEM) anymore. > >>> > >>> The build is currently broken (because of the XAR organization > changes). > >>> > >>> So I propose to remove XWiki Manager: > >>> - stop releasing it > >>> - move the github repo to xwiki-contrib/retired > >>> - update manager.xwiki.org to explain the changes in XWiki 5.2. > >>> - move the manager jira to the retired category > >>> - remove the build in ci.xwiki.org > >>> > >>> Here is my non-binding +1. > >>> > >>> LM > >> > >> -1. This is very premature, the new workspaces haven't been available > >> for a long enough time to be sure it is a good replacement for XEM. > >> > >> Do workspaces fulfill all the needs of existing XEM users? > > > > XEM became a workspaces manager in 3.3 (see > > http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XEM-202) so there is nothing new here. > > The only difference between the new XE and XEM is that wiki manager UI > > is not included while it was hidden in XEM so it's not a big change > > for users since it's super easy to install with Extension Manager. > > > > XEM is and always been pretty much only a set of pom.xml files with > > dependencies and not much more than a home page. Guillaume moved > > Workspaces from XEM to XE making XEM pretty much useless now. > > > >> > >> Does the new implementation offer support for the Farm usage? > > > > You can install Wiki Manager UI using Extension Manager. > > > >> > >> Is there a clear migration path? Manual or automatic? > >> > >> Is the new wiki management UI going to be at least as easy to use as the > >> old one? What's the learning curve for administrators? > >> > >> > >> If the build is broken, it's easier to fix it than to upset a large > >> userbase. Why do we insist so much on maintaining backwards > >> compatibility for Java APIs that we're almost certain nobody uses, yet > >> we're OK with dropping an entire product without a proven alternative, > >> hoping that in one or two more releases that alternative will actually > >> be fully implemented? > > > > The point here is that the alternative is XE. We don't remove XEM > > because the build is broken... It simply does not worth the effort to > > keep it anymore since XE expose the same features. > > Given that as a downstream user I don't really use multiwikis in any > way, this doesn't affect me at all. So +1, less code is always better. > One product less means less confusion for users. > > My main complaint was about the backwards compatibility rule that's not > being followed. > -- > Sergiu Dumitriu > http://purl.org/net/sergiu > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > devs@xwiki.org > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
