Hi, On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 22 Jun 2016, at 10:02, Marius Dumitru Florea < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 7:00 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Hi devs, > >> > >> I’m transforming the brainstorming that was started in the thread > >> http://markmail.org/message/exlndbq3tw2thmmu into a VOTE mail since > this > >> is a very important decision. > >> > >> So I’m asking you to vote for defining a new direction for the XWiki > Core > >> Dev Team (i.e. for the XWiki GitHub Organization). The need was > triggered > >> by the Tour and CKEditor extensions which are currently in xwiki-contrib > >> and that we want our users to have by default. For more details see this > >> thread: http://markmail.org/message/exlndbq3tw2thmmu > >> > >> So here’s the strategy: > >> > >> * Make XWiki Github org == minimal runtime, where minimal means “basic > >> wiki” (page edition, history, linking, wiki markup, etc). The notion of > >> “basic wiki” would need to be better defined but this can be done later > on. > >> * Provide a "Base Flavor" which corresponds to this “basic wiki”, as > part > >> of xwiki-platform (this would be xwiki-platform-distribution). > >> * Provide another flavor, the "Default Flavor” which would add some > >> hand-picked third-party extensions (i.e. from contrib) such as the Tour > app > >> and CKEditor (to start with, we could also add the markdown syntax for > >> example which is one of the most asked syntaxes). Note that this Default > >> Flavor would actually be a “replacement" of xwiki-enterprise. > >> > > > > > >> * The Default Flavor would have at least the same release cycle as the > >> base flavor but it could have more releases (if some of the bundled > >> third-party extensions has some important bug fixes or new features > that we > >> want to offer quickly without waiting for the next base flavor release). > >> > > > > I don't think we need to release the Default Flavor more often than the > > Base Flavor because with this new strategy the users can upgrade > individual > > extensions (those that are not in the Base Flavor) without upgrading the > > WAR. > > As I said, if we find some important bug (for example) and this bug is > only in one of the 3rd party extensions, it would be a pity not to release > just the Default Flavor IMO and wait for 2 months more. Even if users can > upgrade their extensions, it’s better that users new to XWiki > download/install the best possible version right away instead of having to > upgrade. > > We’ll see when the need arises but I don’t think we should stop ourselves > from this possibility. Technically this means putting the Default Flavor in > a separate github repo (same as xwiki-enterprise being in a separate repo). > We need to discuss how we do it: > - consider it’s XE for now and just add the 2 deps of Tour and CK to XE > - introduce a new repo for the default flavor and do the build for it and > deprecate XE in favor of it. For now we probably need to hardcode the > flavor id in the platform WAR till we’re ready to have the flavor selection > screen at startup (and for HSQLDB/Jetty packaging we need a hard-coded > flavor anyway). > I`m personally sensing that we may have a bit of a confusion here between the notion of separate release cycles and the repo in which an extension should be located. AFAIU, the top priority and the actual problem that we want to fix here (mainly for our users and XWIki`s flexibility) is to allow extensions to have independent release cycles. Moving stuff to contrib just got somehow into the discussion as a consequence of the old way we used to handled things (xwiki org = monolith, single version; contrib org = distributed; independent versions). In the past, people (including myself) were pushing to move modules to contrib for the independent versioning feature of contrib, but not necessarily for the "openness for anyone to commit" feature of contrib. That last feature was actually a downside to the quality aspect. If we handle independent versioning within the xwiki GitHub organization, then we will no longer have this downside and we will be able to properly control the quality. This would mean that the Default Flavor would be in a repo under the xwiki org (similar to xwiki-enterprise, as Vincent's proposal) and I would even go as far as suggesting that all the dependencies of the Default Flavor should be located/moved within the xwiki org, perhaps in some xwiki-extensions repo (that we were talking about at some point). I agree that this might sound a bit like going in circles, but IMO it`s not entirely true, now that we introduce independent versioning in the discussion, since it fixes a lot of problems we have in the previous discussions were we were wrongly using Contrib, to compensate for it, since the xwiki org was a big monolith. Now what happens to the remaining modules inside xwiki-platform and the Base Flavor, I would guess that, at least at the beginning, they will continue to function as a monolith, at least until we decide to tackle the notion of "core" dependencies and if we want to do something about them (see my note about this on the previous thread). WDYT? Thanks, Eduard So, having that in mind, I would think of some questions: - > > Thanks > -Vincent > > > Currently the users cannot upgrade the Blog because the new version of > > the Blog depends on a new version of the XWiki WAR. With this new > strategy > > the users will be able to upgrade the Blog (considering that the Blog is > > not part of the Base Flavor). > > > > On the same topic, we have the Extension Updater administration section > > where users can check for extension updates. The problem is that the > > extensions included in a flavor are considered dependencies of the flavor > > and thus are installed as dependencies which means the Extension Updater > > cannot separate them from other technical dependencies and thus won't > check > > for their updates. Ideally a flavor should be a pack of extensions that > are > > installed explicitly (not as dependencies). This way the Extension > Updater > > can propose updates and at the same time the users can uninstall > extensions > > from a flavor without removing the flavor. > > > > Thanks, > > Marius > > > > > >> * The consequence is that the XWiki Dev Team would need to be a bit more > >> careful to monitor the quality of bundled third-party extensions in > contrib > >> (check commits, do some smoke testing, etc). Note that the goal of the > >> Default flavor would not be to offer verticals (for this there should be > >> some contrib flavors) and thus it wouldn’t bundle a lot of third-party > >> extensions. Basically we’ll need to validate the version of those > >> third-party extensions that include in the flavor. > >> > >> My POV is that globally this would offer more flexibility for our users > >> (they’ll be able to install extensions such as CK and Tour in older > XWiki > >> versions and they’ll get more frequent releases) at the cost of some > >> overhead to develop extensions that work in several versions. The dev > team > >> is pretty small and thus it means developing a bit less fast but it’s > >> probably as important, if not more important, to make the code we > develop > >> available in older xwiki versions, as XWiki gains traction. > >> > >> Here’s my +1 > >> > >> Please cast your vote. > >> > >> Thanks > >> -Vincent > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
