Hi Denis and all, > On 10 Jun 2017, at 11:46, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi All, > Sorry to jump in after an already long discussion since we are getting close > to a conclusion, so I just don’t want my intervention to cause more fuzz than > good. > I am in accordance with most of what was said so far, but “Default” looks to > me a less valuable naming than “Standard”, it is not a strong opinion, so I > give my +1 to “Standard” and +0 to “Default”. I will use “Standard" in the > following, just to be clearer, but you can substitute it with “Default” if > you wish (you might notice further subtle differences, or not). > So, what I am not sure about now is why all proposals end with “XWiki flavor” > (and this is not really about the American spelling of flavour ! :D). All > flavours we gonna have surely will be XWiki ones, won’t it ? So if we start > with the “Standard XWiki Flavor”, I am afraid we are going to lead a movement > where everyone will name their flavour with that same suffix. Is that our > intention ? > “XWiki Standard Flavor” would already carry a different meaning, since it > would say more “Standard flavour made by the XWiki team”. However, if our > intent was more to say this is a generic wiki flavour, using “Standard Wiki > Flavor” looks more in line with our intended meaning. And if our meaning is > more that this is just a generic flavour, ending with “Standard Flavor” is > probably simpler, clearer and better. > WDYT ?
I agree with you. I think we have 2 choices for the name that appears in the DW UI: * “Standard”. We may not even need the “Flavor” suffix in the same way as we don’t add an “Extension” suffix in the EM UI. IMO the DW UI for flavors should indicate the author in the UI, something like ”Standard” and then “developed by XWiki Development Team” or “developed by XWiki SAS” or “developed by Denis Gervalle”. * "XWiki Standard” or “XWiki Standard Flavor” to indicate it’s the one made by the XWiki open source dev team. So that could be the full name but the name we display in the DW UI could simply be “Standard Flavor” and then “developed by XWiki Development Team”, etc. If we want to use the term “Wiki” then it could come as a replacement for the “Standard” term, to mention that it’s a generic wiki flavor, as opposed to an intranet flavor, a knowledge base flavor, etc. But I agree that “Wiki Flavor” is a good contender (and one that Ludovic mentioned too, he even mentioned Structured Wiki Flavor). I’d be +0 on “Wiki Flavor”. “Standard Wiki Flavor” is also possible and hints that there can be other generic Wiki flavors that are not standard. So I’m also +0 for it. Now outside of the DW UI, the full name of the flavors done by the XWiki Dev Team could be prefixed with XWiki as in “the XWiki Standard Flavor” (or “XWiki Demo Flavor”). Other companies or individuals would name is with their identity, such as “the <my company> Procedure Flavor”. WDYT? Thanks -Vincent > -- > Denis Gervalle > SOFTEC sa - CEO > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 16:48, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> > wrote: > So here is the current situation > > = Proposition which don't annoy people enough to get a veto > > * "Default XWiki Flavor" (+3) > * "Standard XWiki Flavor" (+2) > > = Someone gave a veto on those > > * "Base XWiki Flavor" > * "Classic XWiki Flavor" (good success for this one until it hits Edy > and Vincent) > * "Raw XWiki Flavor" > * "Starter XWiki Flavor" > * "XWiki Flavor” > * "Generic XWiki Flavor" > > Anyone want to change his votes ? > > I don't really have a preference between "Default" and "Standard". > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 4:18 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: >> So I’ve read this thread and here’s my POV: >> >> * "Base XWiki Flavor” -1 (same reason as Thomas) >> * “Classic XWiki Flavor” -1 (same reason as Edy, it means there’s a non >> classic and *better* one and we don’t have one so it doesn’t make sense) >> * “Raw XWiki Flavor” -1 (not enough meaning IMO and a bit deprecatory) >> * “Starter XWiki Flavor” -1 (would mean there’s another flavor which isn’t >> the case) >> * "Default XWiki Flavor” +1 >> * "Generic XWiki Flavor” +1 >> * “Standard XWiki Flavor” +1 (makes the most sense IMO) >> * "XWiki Flavor”. Here it’s hard to understand that “XWiki” actually means >> “developed by the XWiki project” and it would work only if other flavors >> don’t have “XWiki” in the name. This is why I’m -1 ATM for it. IMO it’s not >> easy enough to differentiate and understand what it means compared to other >> listed flavors such “Procedure Flavor” from XWiki SAS or “Demo Flavor” from >> contrib. >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >>> On 24 May 2017, at 11:51, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi devs, >>> >>> I'm getting closer to finish with the hard work around new platform >>> flavor which is going to replace XE. >>> >>> Need to decide what user will see in the Flavor picker when installed XWiki >>> now. >>> >>> As a reminder we decided that this would be a generic flavor, not tied >>> to any specific use case (so forget about "Knwonledge Base Flavor" >>> :)). >>> >>> Here is a few ideas gathered in previous mails: >>> * "XWiki Flavor" >>> * "Default XWiki Flavor" >>> * "Generic XWiki Flavor" >>> * "Base XWiki Flavor" >>> >>> "Generic" is probably a way too technical term. >>> >>> "Base" would be misleading IMO since it's not really a base flavor. >>> Its primary goal is not to be used as a dependency (of course it's >>> fine to have it as dependency if you just want to add pre installed >>> extensions to the default flavor). It's a -1 for me. >>> >>> Frankly I would simply go for "XWiki Flavor". I know, it's not going >>> to be the only flavor for XWiki but it's obvious when you actually see >>> severals of those in the picker anyway and I find it nicer than >>> "Default XWiki Flavor" which basically means the same thing since the >>> XWiki core project does not plan to provide any other flavor. I'm also >>> fine with "Default XWiki Favor" if others think it's a better name. >>> >>> WDYT ? >>> >>> -- >>> Thomas Mortagne >> > > > > -- > Thomas Mortagne
