Guys as I answered to Vincent and Edy the name only matter if we want it to be a flavor, something a user install.
If we want to restrict it to be a dependency only (kind of an abstract flavor) which seems to be the case for almost everyone who answered this thread then it won't be listed with other flavors and the name does not really matter much anymore. I'm fine with that, I just want it to be clear and not debate for ages if it the end nobody want it to be a flavor :) On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Guillaume Delhumeau <[email protected]> wrote: > * XWiki Base (on which you can construct), as a synonym of "Foundation" > (for a building). Foundation could be misunderstood because of the Software > foundations like Eclipse or Apache. > * XWiki Stand (as a synonym for Base) or XWiki Shelf > * XWiki Kernel (quite technical but I think technical users are the > targeted audience) > * XWiki Nude (ok it could be confusing, especially with the X in XWiki, but > at least the description is good) > * XWiki Bare > * XWiki Skeleton (already proposed by Paul for the KB flavor) > * XWiki Minimum Requirement > > I think the best proposition is "Base" but I'm sad we don't find a better > name. > > > 2017-04-04 14:53 GMT+02:00 Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]>: > >> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:46 PM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Thomas Mortagne < >> [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> >> So as I answered Vincent already: you want to get rid of this flavor. >> >> >> > >> > Not really, no. I *am* in favor of having a Base Flavor. It would be >> > invaluable for when writing other flavors (including the >> Defaut/Standard/KB >> > one), since it will take care of really basic setup, like the Velocity >> > Macro and such. Ideally, a new Flavor should depend on the Base, plus a >> > handful of applications/extensions and it should be set. >> >> I don't think you understood me :) >> >> What you want is a XAR but it does not need to be a flavor. >> >> > >> > >> >> >> >> The point of a Flavor is to be installed as a top level UI, being a >> >> XAR is enough to be a flavor dependency. >> >> >> > >> >> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> >> > >> >> > As I`ve mentioned in the other mail, I`d prefer "Base" or "Minimal" >> (as >> >> > Vincent mentioned as well), mainly because I would not want users to >> be >> >> > encouraged to use it directly, but instead, to use a flavor that >> builds >> >> on >> >> > top of the Base and brings value (like the "Standard" flavor does). >> > >> > >> > Here I was just talking about the fact that I prefer to emphasize the >> > "boilerplate" nature of this flavor, vs the Lite/Mini/etc. which might >> > imply less resource consumption. Nothing more. >> > >> >> >> >> > Now, I`m getting a bit confused here as to the nature of this base >> >> flavor. >> >> > Is it a flavor or is it a distribution? Do we also have an XWiki >> "Base" >> >> > distribution (war) that is slimmed down to support at least the XWiki >> >> Base >> >> > *flavor*, and anything else will be installed with EM, according to >> what >> >> > any additional "extended" flavor instructs (i.e. through its >> >> dependencies)? >> >> >> >> We have since 8.0 a XWiki distribution (with its WAR and the related >> >> set of jetty/hsqldb, Debian packages, etc.) which contain pretty much >> >> only the strict minimum or platform stuff you can't install easily >> >> with EM (like plugins) and which ask you which flavor you want to >> >> install in the Distribution Wizard (it does not declare any default UI >> >> like XE does). >> >> >> > >> > Cool, then, IMO, we should be promoting only that, and not the XE base >> > distribution (which we could remove). >> >> This is the whole point but it's not really what we are debating here :) >> >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Eduard >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> > Thanks, >> >> > Eduard >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < >> >> > [email protected]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> If we want to use this flavor as a dependency for the other Flavors >> that >> >> >> will be built on top, than I would like it to be called just >> "XWiki", so >> >> >> your 1). >> >> >> All the other flavors built on top would have composed names like >> "XWiki >> >> >> KB", "XWiki Groupware", etc. >> >> >> >> >> >> Otherwise my vote goes to 3) Base or Basic. >> >> >> >> >> >> I think we should first define what this contains. For me it should >> not >> >> >> just be EM, but all the default XWiki capabilities to create content: >> >> from >> >> >> administration, to users, to templates, to editors, to viewers, to >> >> >> livetable, to navigation, etc. :) >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> Caty >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Thomas Mortagne < >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> > >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected] >> > >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> On 3 Apr 2017, at 17:22, Thomas Mortagne < >> >> [email protected]> >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Vincent Massol < >> [email protected] >> >> > >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> > >>> Hi, >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>>> On 3 Apr 2017, at 16:18, Thomas Mortagne < >> >> [email protected] >> >> >> > >> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> Hi devs, >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> Since 8.0 we have in xwiki-platform a flavor simply called >> "XWiki >> >> >> > >>>> Flavor" which contains more or less the strict minimum to have >> >> >> > >>>> something you can call an XWiki instance (Administration, >> >> Extension >> >> >> > >>>> Manager, a home page, etc.). >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> Since we want to promote the new Knowledge Base flavor have a >> >> >> > >>>> concurrent called "XWiki" is not really making it a favor so >> we >> >> >> should >> >> >> > >>>> probably find another name for it. >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> Here are some ideas: >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> 1) "XWiki" Flavor, it's Ok after all >> >> >> > >>>> 2) "Default" Flavor >> >> >> > >>>> 3) "Base” Flavor >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>>> 4) "Lite" Flavor >> >> >> > >>>> 5) "Mini" Flavor >> >> >> > >>>> 6) "Minimum" Flavor >> >> >> > >>>> 7) "Pico" Flavor >> >> >> > >>>> 8) <another word that means small> Flavor >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>> This raises a question: Why do we have such a flavor? I don’t >> >> think >> >> >> we >> >> >> > need one if we have the KB flavor. >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >>> The only flavor that would make sense to me is a “Base” flavor >> >> that >> >> >> is >> >> >> > **empty** (ie no wiki pages) and that serves as a common base >> minimum >> >> for >> >> >> > other flavors. It would contain the bare minimum to have an XWiki >> >> >> runtime. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> Note sure what is your point exactly. You want to discuss if >> it's >> >> >> > >> allowed to install it as flavor or if it's only a dependency of >> >> >> > >> another flavor ? >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > My point is that we should only offer 2 things: >> >> >> > > 1) the KB flavor >> >> >> > > 2) or let the user not choose any flavor and have an empty wiki >> (no >> >> >> wiki >> >> >> > pages and minimal set of core extensions) >> >> >> > >> >> >> > So you want to remove this flavor. You don't need to install any >> >> >> > flavor to have an empty wiki. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > What is the “XWiki Flavor” right now? You mentioned that it >> >> contained >> >> >> > wiki pages (such as home page): >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > "contains more or less the strict minimum to have >> >> >> > > something you can call an XWiki instance (Administration, >> Extension >> >> >> > > Manager, a home page, etc.).” >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > This doesn’t look like the minimum to me. >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > So the first thing to agree is about the scope of this “base” >> >> flavor. >> >> >> > Then we can name it. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > When it was introduced it was defined as the flavor containing >> what we >> >> >> > think is common to any kind of flavor, the core UI extensions >> >> >> > basically like you have the core jar extensions on the WAR side. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > If it’s a minimal empty flavor then the best name for me are: >> >> >> > > - “Minimal" >> >> >> > > - "Base" >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > Thanks >> >> >> > > -Vincent >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> Thanks >> >> >> > >>> -Vincent >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >>>> I don't think keeping "XWiki" is such a great idea. Default is >> >> even >> >> >> > worst. >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> I like "Lite" but might sound too much like "the very limited >> >> free >> >> >> > >>>> version, you are going to have advertisement in a month" >> theses >> >> >> days. >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> If I had to vote for only one it would be "Mini" but I'm fine >> >> with >> >> >> any >> >> >> > >>>> of the following proposals. >> >> >> > >>>> >> >> >> > >>>> Thanks, >> >> >> > >>>> -- >> >> >> > >>>> Thomas Mortagne >> >> >> > >>> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> -- >> >> >> > >> Thomas Mortagne >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> > -- >> >> >> > Thomas Mortagne >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Thomas Mortagne >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Thomas Mortagne >> > > > > -- > Guillaume Delhumeau ([email protected]) > Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS > Committer on the XWiki.org project -- Thomas Mortagne
