On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 22 May 2017, at 16:27, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On 22 May 2017, at 15:34, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I would be more in favor of moving them to some extension than can be >>>> easily installed if really needed. >>> >>> The downside with this approach compared to the legacy approach are: >>> >>> * The user will gets broken before they can understand the problem and fix >>> it so bad from a usability POV. They’ll also need to understand where to >>> get the extension and install it >>> * We break a contract if we consider that default pages are a contract (we >>> need to decide about that but I think it would be fair to say the pages are >>> a contract) >> >> Well by that definition we "broke" quite a lot of XE pages over the >> years by moving them to not bundled contrib extensions or simply by >> modifying some page that never been supposed to be API. Saying any >> page is an API is really not a good idea in the current state. We >> could discuss an explicit way to indicate what is an API and what is >> internal for future pages if you want but right now It should be a >> case by case I think. >> >> If you absolutely want to keep them, keep them. I'm just saying that I >> would be OK to move them away (provided that they are easy to install >> if really needed) since they display stuff that many recent users >> won't understand ("space" ?) and I don't think they are used that much >> in extensions. > > Yes but that’s not the main point. The main point is breaking the XWiki UI of > the user who upgrades (and thus introducing a WTF effect - what I called a > usability issue). So what you’re saying in essence, is that it’s ok to do so > from your POV.
I don't understand. Standard XE UI does not use those pages anywhere anymore so what is going to be broken exactly when you upgrade ? My point is that it's only supposed to break extensions that would use those pages or if the user have customization that rely on those pages but that's true for any change in any page most of which never been designed as APIs (so a lot less carefully than is required for an API). > > Any other opinion on this (I’d like more before deciding on something)? > > Thanks > -Vincent > >> >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Vincent >>> >>>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Hi devs, >>>>> >>>>> We have this jira issue I created a while ago and I’d like to move >>>>> forward: >>>>> https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-13101 >>>>> >>>>> I have one question: >>>>> Should we move the 4 pages into a legacy module in platform and bundle it >>>>> in XE or just remove them? >>>>> >>>>> My POV: >>>>> We could consider the pages as APIs I guess and use the API strategy of >>>>> moving deprecated APIs to legacy. >>>>> >>>>> WDYT? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -Vincent >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Thomas Mortagne >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Thomas Mortagne > -- Thomas Mortagne
