+1 for both

2018-01-15 10:47 GMT+01:00 Vincent Massol <[email protected]>:

> Same as Thomas too.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> > On 12 Jan 2018, at 13:50, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi devs,
> >
> > These are the current code style rules for committed XML wiki pages:
> > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/XWikiXMLFilesCodeStyle
> >
> > = Proposal 1 =
> >
> > I was personally not aware we had documented these practices that we had
> > been applying since forever. It's good that we have them, but there seems
> > to be no mention about committing changes for the "creationDate", "date"
> > and "contentUpdateDate" fields.
> >
> > Part of the committers (including myself) are applying the old practice
> of
> > omitting changes to the date fields when committing a change to an XML
> wiki
> > page. However, since this practice is not written and agreed upon, its
> > usage is not consistent.
> >
> > So, the proposal is to include the rule of not committing changes on the
> > date fields of XML wiki pages.
> >
> > The rationale, AFAIR, includes:
> > * After an upgrade, users should not see "ghost" modifications in their
> > wiki (e.g. when sorting by date in the Page Index). This affects even
> more
> > manual imports with the "as backup" option enabled.
> > * On release, any date changes of a default translation XML page will
> > produce N other XML page changes, for each translation of the modified
> page
> > (due to the way l10n exports the translations based on the latest version
> > of the default language of that page).
> > * others?
> >
> > = Proposal 2 =
> >
> > Now, building on this, I would like to make a second proposal (which I
> > don't believe deserves a separate thread):
> > 1) Let's remove all date fields from committed XML wiki pages in our
> source
> > repository
> > 2) Let's make sure that the XAR import properly handles empty or missing
> > date fields and falls back on the current date
> > 3) Let's update the xar:format goal to remove the date fields
> > (configurable, since it could they might still be needed by some content
> > projects, etc.)
> > 4) Let's make the build fail (xar:verify) if the XML wiki pages contain
> > date fields (again configurable, as above)
> >
> > Note: All the above still depend on the first proposal of not committing
> > date changes to XML files (which will be simplified by point 3) above).
> >
> > The rationale for this is that we have always wanted to fix our "dates
> > problem", since after installation, the wiki is populated with pages
> > created in 2009, which is extremely odd to users that have just installed
> > XWiki. This second proposal sounds to me like a solution for that.
> >
> > WDYT?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Eduard
>
>


-- 
Guillaume Delhumeau ([email protected])
Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS
Committer on the XWiki.org project

Reply via email to