> On 8 Feb 2019, at 14:00, Marius Dumitru Florea
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 1:51 PM Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> On 8 Feb 2019, at 12:45, Marius Dumitru Florea <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 10:25 AM Vincent Massol <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 8 Feb 2019, at 09:20, Marius Dumitru Florea <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 9:52 AM Vincent Massol <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Marius/All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> See below
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 31 Jan 2019, at 11:29, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Marius/all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 30 Jan 2019, at 15:45, Marius Dumitru Florea <
>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm working on https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-1660 (I need it
>>>> for
>>>>>>>> https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-13352) and I'd like to change
>> the
>>>>>> page
>>>>>>>> rename job (from refactoring module) to update the existing objects
>>>>>> when a
>>>>>>>> class is renamed *if the "Update links" options is checked*.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course, we could add a new option (e.g. "Update objects") but:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * it complicates the rename UI (too many options)
>>>>>>>> * I think most of the users understand the current "Update links"
>>>>>> option as
>>>>>>>> "update the places where this page is *used*". I don't think it
>> makes
>>>>>> sense
>>>>>>>> to have separate options (at least at the UI level) for things like
>>>>>> "Update
>>>>>>>> macro calls" or "Update image includes".
>>>>>>>> * I don't see why you would want to update the back-links but not
>> the
>>>>>>>> objects (or the other way around).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sounds good to me in general.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If we agree on using a single option ("Update links") then the next
>>>>>>>> questions are:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * Is there a better name? I think "Update links" is a good name for
>>>>>> simple
>>>>>>>> users so I would keep it. Another option is "Update references" but
>> it
>>>>>> has
>>>>>>>> a special meaning for XWiki developers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maybe "Update other pages” with a hint saying “Ensure that other
>> pages
>>>>>> using the renamed pages continue to work after the rename”.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * Should we update the hint for the "Update links" option? I think
>> we
>>>>>>>> should, but only for advanced users, since they should be aware of
>> the
>>>>>>>> implications of renaming a class. Simple users are not aware of the
>>>>>>>> existence of objects, most probably, so I wouldn't complicate their
>>>>>> lives.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would be nicer to find a single message that work for everyone but I
>>>>>> agree it’s not easy if we wish to provide details.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I feel a nicer option would be to NOT show “Update other pages” for
>>>>>> simple users since that should always be checked. Only offer the
>>>> ability to
>>>>>> uncheck it for advanced users and this solves the hint issue too :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Nobody replied to this proposal but I really find it the best by far
>> and
>>>>>> it solves your other questions too while making the UI simpler
>> globally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The only issue I see with this option is that by hiding the "Update
>>>> Links"
>>>>> the simple users might not be aware of the side effects of the rename
>>>>> operation: the fact that other pages will have to be updated. Seeing
>>>> that a
>>>>> page you want to rename is referenced in many places can make you think
>>>>> twice about the rename.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>> We could keep that info, it could be useful indeed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I can keep the message but then I'll probably need to display different
>>> messages for simple and advanced users. Moreover, ideally the message
>>> should be updated whenever the Preserve Children checkbox is clicked
>> (e.g.
>>> to indicate that there are more pages to update if the child pages are
>>> preserved).
>>
>>
>
>> By messages I meant to indicate (as information) the number of links
>> leading to the renamed pages.
>>
>
> Sure, but it's not just links. There's also xobjects of a class that is
> among those pages being renamed. There are two options:
>
> * show a single number (e.g. "There are *10 other pages* that are going to
> be updated because they are referencing the pages that are being renamed")
> . The issue here is de-duplication: if you simply sum up the backlinks +
> xobjects + etc. then you can have pages counted multiple times... Moreover,
> we would need to provide a link to a view showing these other pages (as we
> have for backlinks right now), and having a unified backlinks + xobjects +
> etc. is complex.
Why is it complex? For me it’s about putting references to pages in a Set.
Whether the update will come from a link or an xobject can be seen as a detail.
We could simply mention the number of pages (i.e. references) that will be
updated as you suggested and provide a LT for that (should be easy).
We could also decide to not show anything for simple users.
> * show multiple numbers (i.e. "There are 4 pages that have links to the
> pages being renamed. There are 7 pages with xobjects defined by classes
> that are going to be renamed. etc.”)
If you think that’s interesting info (and it’s probably the case), we could
display this one for advanced users, as additional info.
Thanks
-Vincent
>
>
>>
>> For me this is the same info whether you’re simple or advanced, no? OTOH
>> the checkbox for advanced users could provide additional info as hint.
>>
>> Or we just don’t display this message at all for simple users. I wouldn’t
>> mind either. Makes it simpler in practice :)
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was referring to hiding the option (the checkbox). This makes the UI
>>>> simpler to use for simple user, which is the direction we want to go
>> and I
>>>> cannot find tons of reasons why simple users would want to not fix
>> links…
>>>> Actually in the past all issues that were raised were the opposite,
>> users
>>>> who didn’t check the box, and then we made it checked by default.
>>>>
>>>>> Now, the current hint for "Update Links" doesn't indicate all the side
>>>>> effects. For instance it indicates the number of back-links to the page
>>>>> you're trying to rename but it *doesn't include back-links to child
>>>> pages*
>>>>> (when child pages are preserved). So what I said above it not really
>> true
>>>>> ATM either.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, it’s actually worse in a sense :) Right now it makes it seem as if
>>>> it’ll work perfectly well…
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Marius
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> -Vincent
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [snip]
