> On 10 Jul 2017, at 11:09, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 2:00 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 9 Jul 2017, at 13:55, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Note to be clear: I prefer having the feature in the Extension Tweak >>> Extension that not having it at all ;) But I also prefer having it by >>> default in EM as an advanced. The main use case/need I see is >>> installing/uninstalling XAR applications and those are not really dangerous >>> in general. >>> >>> I also agree with you that we need to try preserving the stability of XWiki >>> as much as possible. We could even make some checks and only allow some use >>> cases (the XAR ones). >>> >>> Also there are some uses case for which I don’t understand why they’re >>> dangerous. Why would it be dangerous for example to uninstall the Tour >>> Application? >> > > Again you are mixing different things here. The Tour application > should be listed as optional in the default flavor so there is no need > to force anything.
I know, but I’m taking it as an example. I’m considering the case when a user wants to uninstall an extension not marked as optional. > >> At least the ability to uninstall an extension without uninstalling its >> dependencies should be a built in feature, do we agree with that? > > Are you sure that's what you want to ask ? That's how it always worked. Are you sure that removing it won’t remove the flavor? AFAIR this was the issue before for extensions bundled in the flavor. Thanks -Vincent > >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >>> >>> Thanks >>> -Vincent >>> >>>> On 9 Jul 2017, at 13:47, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Thomas/All, >>>> >>>>> On 9 Jul 2017, at 13:28, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 12:35 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7 Jul 2017, at 12:22, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 12:16, Thomas Mortagne >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> I really don't understand how you end up with this reasoning. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The only one that knows if a dependency is optional is the developer >>>>>>> I agree. >>>>>>> of the extension so what is a workaround here is the huge mess >>>>>>> generator you are proposing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As I already said 99% of our dependencies are really not optional, in >>>>>>> practice only a few flavor dependencies are and one or two other use >>>>>>> cases. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is two different subjects that get mixed up here: >>>>>>> * clearly state in an extension what is absolutely required to work >>>>>>> and what is a nice to have, this is standard stuff and this is what we >>>>>>> are talking about here >>>>>>> * hack your way in the extension index to remove an extension without >>>>>>> removing the extension claiming to require that, this is at best >>>>>>> something for >>>>>>> http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/Extension+Tweak >>>>>>> Or the UI of EM can provide a big red warning based dialog to allow >>>>>>> admin to overwrite the default behaviour with a message about the risk. >>>>>>> Just best of both world proposal :), but I don’t know how complex it >>>>>>> could be. I am also fine with a Extension Tweak solution. >>>>>> >>>>>> I agree and this is exactly what I was hinting at in my past reply with: >>>>>> >>>>>> " What if I want to uninstall an extension which is NOT marked as >>>>>> optional (ie force uninstall at your own risks)?” >>>>>> >>>>>> I disagree that Extension Tweak is enough. This is quite technical and >>>>>> not installed by default. I’d really prefer that this be a feature of EM >>>>>> (force install and force uninstall). >>>>> >>>>> So you are saying that going against the recommendations expressed by >>>>> an extension author is less technical than installing an extension >>>>> dedicated to dangerous manipulations ? >>>> >>>> When it’s needed the user will not find it (very low discoverability) and >>>> installing an unsupported extension (by the xwiki core dev team) is also >>>> not a great idea for doing anything that can be dangerous. >>>> >>>> It would really be awkward to me that you’d need to install an extension >>>> for being allowing to force install/uninstall an extension. That sounds >>>> too small and weird a use case. This just looks like an Advanced Option >>>> that should be there by default in EM. And here the user doesn’t care >>>> about all the other stuff that the Extension Tweak Extension can do. >>>> Personally I dislike this Extension Tweak Extension and I see it as a >>>> temporary bandaid till we get its features inside XWiki. I see it in a >>>> similar way as I see a *Util class in Java (which is bad design); it means >>>> that the features are missing from the default. >>>> >>>> Another good example is the ability to reinstall a SNAPSHOT extension. >>>> Right now you have to use the Extension Tweak extension (to clear the >>>> extension cache) in all wiki where you want to do that and since you do >>>> that in dev mode and that in dev mode you keep having different xwiki >>>> instances, it just doesn’t work and the extra work is too overwhelming. So >>>> similarly we should allow force reinstall of an extension, even for >>>> snapshots, and not need the Extension Tweak extension for that. At the >>>> very least, the ability to clear the cache should be built in, in the >>>> Admin UI for EM. >>>> >>>> I’m not saying that Extensions that are not useful in general, just that >>>> there are some admin features that needs to be built in, to make life >>>> simpler. And what’s in Extension Tweaks are good candidates. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> -Vincent >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Note that the "Force install” use case is for example for forcing to >>>>>> install a XAR extension even if the version requirements are not honored. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> -Vincent >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Denis Gervalle >>>>>>> SOFTEC sa - CEO >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It`s very nice to hear we are progressing on this topic, but I`m not >>>>>>>> very >>>>>>>> fond of the current solution. Marking dependencies as optional still >>>>>>>> puts >>>>>>>> the responsibility on the developer to actually do that and makes the >>>>>>>> admin >>>>>>>> dependent on the developer's choice and discipline. Feels more like a >>>>>>>> workaround that we will end up having to support. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Working for building whitelists is a tedious process and we will surely >>>>>>>> miss things, and this is only about things that we control in the >>>>>>>> standard >>>>>>>> flavor. What about extensions and their dependencies? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sure, as Caty suggests, one option is to make everything optional by >>>>>>>> default and only have to explicitly specify if a dependency is >>>>>>>> mandatory. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hoping we can get to a point where all the power is to the admin >>>>>>>> running >>>>>>>> XWiki, not the developer. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Getting past the above "critique", it's still very nice to hear that we >>>>>>>> will now have one solution to this old problem. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Eduard >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Thomas Mortagne >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Hi Thomas, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 5 Jul 2017, at 17:00, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi everyone, >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I just implemented https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XCOMMONS-1229 which >>>>>>>>>>> allows to indicate that a dependency will be installed by default >>>>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>>>> does not have a string dependency link with the extension, meaning >>>>>>>>>>> that uninstalling it won't impact the backward dependencies (so they >>>>>>>>>>> are not really backward dependencies in that case :)). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is very nice. What if I want to uninstall an extension which is >>>>>>>>>> NOT >>>>>>>>> marked as optional (ie force uninstall at your own risks)? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If it's not optional then... it's not optional and require to >>>>>>>>> uninstall backward dependency. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Now we need to decide what exactly is optional in Standard flavor. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Here are some ideas: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * application-help-center >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * xwiki-platform-menu-ui >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * xwiki-platform-wiki-ui-mainwiki >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * xwiki-platform-office-ui >>>>>>>>>>> * xwiki-platform-invitation-ui >>>>>>>>>>> * xwiki-platform-appwithinminutes-ui >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I think it needs some refactoring first since the pages it generates >>>>>>>>> still need some pages from AWM. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Actually I tough about that and IMO if an extension has AWM pages it >>>>>>>>> should have a non optional dependency on AWM (i.e. it would be >>>>>>>>> optional from flavor point of view but non optional from other >>>>>>>>> extension point of view). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * xwiki-platform-linkchecker-ui >>>>>>>>>>> * xwiki-platform-sandbox >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> * xwiki-platform-sharepage-ui >>>>>>>>>>> * xwiki-platform-distribution-flavor-tour >>>>>>>>>>> * application-templates-ui >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I did not actually tried to uninstall those so it's possible it's >>>>>>>>>>> not >>>>>>>>>>> a good idea to uninstall some of them right now (hardcoded use >>>>>>>>>>> somewhere maybe). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> WDYT ? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The list sounds good to start with (we need to test remove them first >>>>>>>>> ofc). >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>> -Vincent >>> >> > > > > -- > Thomas Mortagne
