Hi,
I'm sorry, but nothing related to configuration inside pages looks very
"wiki-like" to me. We're not talking about content pages here, but rather
about a preset/pack of preferences (I would actually call them more code
than configuration, to be honest, since we're talking about CSS and LESS)
which have an identity. Once you start changing their values, they lose
their identity and you can't call them "Iceberg" or "Charcoal" (etc.)
anymore. Once you customize them, they are "CustomIceberg" or "MyIceberg"
(etc.), if you really want to preserve a hint of the base of your
customizations.
IMO, we should have a distinction between the default color themes and the
user contributed ones (this also includes customized copies of default
ones). I believe this would actually help the user in getting a better
understanding of what is going on instead of asking them to digg through
the document history, look at diffs, etc. Nobody wants to do that.
I don't like (-0) the idea of DefaultColorTheme being a useless copy of
Iceberg. If we want, we could store in an unexposed property of the
FlamingoThemes application what is the default color theme, so that the
user can have a "default" option or a "Reset to default" when choosing what
theme to use. Also, new versions of XWiki could update that property's
value (as part of the code), for when we will want to introduce a new
"default" theme for future versions of XWiki. I believe users need to be
able to see and easily experience new features, without asking them to drop
their customizations or write code (i.e. compared to what they would get if
they intall a new/clean XWiki instance with the latest version).
I do like (+1) the other 2 bullet points of Approach 1 ("standard").
Hitting "Customize" when using a standard theme should generate you a copy
for your customization which you can then select from the list and apply.
Heck, we could even make a nice distinction in the UI (or at least in the
Select input) between the standard themes and the custom(-ized) ones.
IMO, the important part to distinguish the fact that the configuration part
(for a regular, non-dev) is choosing *which* color theme to use, while the
customization (i.e. coding, done by someone that understands CSS/LESS, in
this case) part is editing/customizing your own version of a color theme.
Should be easy to make the choice if we look at it this way, since it would
be similar to what we do for other parts of XWiki that need either
configuration (i.e. choosing *what* to use) and that might need also some
customization (i.e. modifying or defining *how* that choice will perform
its job).
General note/rant/reiteration: I am very much in favor of resisting the
urge to "edit everything" (that's what actually got us to the current
"problem"), even if it is a wiki at heart, since no software maintainers
can provide you any time of support or upgrade paths that can factor in the
fact that you are just barging in and making a beautiful mess of the code
they developed. IMO, we just need to draw the line where the software ends
and the wiki begins, otherwise users will be trapped/stuck with outdated
and un-upgradable XWiki versions and will be regretting their choice. We
need to think of the admins as well, and not only from the POV of the dev
that wants to make everything possible. You should not need a developer
(possibly the original developer of the project/customizations) in order to
make a really basic operation such as an upgrade. Maybe I'm saying
"sometimes less is more"? :)
Thanks,
Eduard
On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 10:37 AM, Marius Dumitru Florea <
[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 4:53 PM, Thomas Mortagne <
> [email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > So it seems that 2) is currently leading with Ecaterina and Vincent.
> >
> > Guillaume I'm not sure if you prefer 2) or 3) (i.e. what do you think
> > about delete ?).
> >
> >
>
> > Marius, does your proposal means you are more for 1) but with the
> > difference that the default color theme would be allowed for edit ?
> >
>
> Yes, but I'm ok with 2)
>
>
> >
> > Any other point of view input ?
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 2:02 PM, Thomas Mortagne <
> > [email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > To give my opinion, I’m hesitating about 2 approaches:
> > >> >
> > >> > Approach 1: “standard"
> > >> > ==================
> > >> >
> > >> > * We should have “Default Color Theme” be a copy from the Iceberg
> > color
> > >> theme page. I think I’d prefer the copy to be done at runtime; for
> > example
> > >> if the currently defined color theme page doesn’t exist when going to
> > the
> > >> L&F > Themes admin page, create it by copying Iceberg. This provides a
> > self
> > >> healing feature if the color theme page has been removed/doesn’t
> > exist/etc.
> > >> >
> > >> > * Predefined color theme pages should be considered “standard” and a
> > >> warning message displayed if a user wants to edit them. BTW would be
> > nice
> > >> to have a feature to have a customized message per “type”. For example
> > for
> > >> color theme pages we would display a message saying that the user
> should
> > >> copy the page to customize it instead of editing it.
> > >> >
> > >> > * The Color Theme UI should also be improved a bit to have a
> > “Customize”
> > >> button on color theme pages that would perform a copy to let the user
> > >> customize a theme.
> > >> >
> > >> > Approach 2: “demo"
> > >> > ================
> > >> >
> > >> > * Consider all color themes to be demo content and once the user
> > starts
> > >> modifying them don’t merge them anymore
> > >> > * When we want to provide modified color themes, introduce new theme
> > >> pages
> > >> > * Don’t provide a “Default Color Theme” page. Directly set “Iceberg”
> > to
> > >> be the default CT.
> > >> >
> > >> > Analysis
> > >> > =======
> > >> >
> > >> > Approach 2 is more wiki style and simpler for sure. Users can use
> the
> > >> diff feature and the rollback feature if they want to go back to the
> > >> original versions.
> > >> >
> > >> > I think I’m leaning more towards 2 ATM.
> > >>
> > >> So you think delete is OK too, right ?
> > >>
> > >
> > > For me delete is ok too. IMO we should provide just a few themes by
> > > default, and the user should be able to uninstall and install what
> themes
> > > he wants (ideally he would be able to preview them live).
> > >
> > > I don't like the copying part very much. Users like to have a base to
> > start
> > > from, but they also have history as a fallback.
> > >
> > > Also we rarely make changes to ColorThemes, especially since they are
> not
> > > very complex since they should contain only variables. Still it all
> > depends
> > > on how well the Default Theme is tested initially.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Caty
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> >
> > >> > Thanks
> > >> > -Vincent
> > >> >
> > >> >> On 25 Apr 2018, at 11:35, Vincent Massol <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Is this a VOTE or a proposal or a brainstorming? I’m asking since
> > >> nobody has voted yet, not even Thomas (except if we consider that
> > “prefer”
> > >> means +1 and “OK” means +0 ;)).
> > >> >>
> > >> >> From the answer it seems we might need a new VOTE since several new
> > >> points have been added to the discussion. I’m not able to VOTE right
> > now.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Thanks
> > >> >> -Vincent
> > >> >>
> > >> >>> On 23 Apr 2018, at 12:29, Thomas Mortagne <
> > [email protected]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Hi xwikiers,
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Following new XAR entry type mail here is a question about color
> > >> >>> themes we provide in standard XWiki (Cerulean, Charcoal, etc.).
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> 1) Standard stuff, if you want a custom color theme create a new
> one
> > >> >>> (would be nice to be able to copy a standard one and propose it
> when
> > >> >>> you try to edit a standard one).
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> 2) Demo content, edit and delete it all you want and upgrade won't
> > >> >>> touch a customized theme to avoid surprises (background color
> > changed
> > >> >>> a bit in the standard version which now collide with your logo)
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> 3) Same as 2 but delete is bad (same as home page)
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> WDYT ?
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> I'm think I prefer 1) but I'm OK with 3) if other think it's more
> > >> >>> example than standard material. Let's say -0 for 2).
> > >> >>>
> > >> >>> Thanks,
> > >> >>> --
> > >> >>> Thomas Mortagne
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Thomas Mortagne
> > >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Mortagne
> >
>
