Re: [SMW-devel] Adding Site Settings support to SMW?
Hey, Unfortunately, there isn't yet a public example of an extension that hooks into Site Settings Just from the description you provided, it is still not clear enough for me to say much about it. The general concern with putting it into SMW is that this forces the people working on SMW to hold it into account. This means making sure it does not get broken when changes are made on the master branch. That is hard to do since it requires the Site Settings extension. If the code is really trivial, then perhaps this is fine. Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw - http://www.bn2vs.com Software craftsmanship advocate Evil software architect at Wikimedia Germany ~=[,,_,,]:3 -- Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] Adding Site Settings support to SMW?
Hi, I can't say anything about the code (as I haven't seen it yet) but three things I'd like to comment: newest of these three, and SMW doesn't connect to it yet, but I would like to add code in to SMW to do that, most likely via another class, that would be called SMWSiteSettings. I'm not a huge fan of such interdependencies (and AdminLinks is no exception). I'd ask about it here before trying to send in a patch. I'm not planning on adding any testing code for this new code, just like there isn't for the Having no tests (no matter what language or circumstances) will give me a hard time to +2 (you don't need the SiteSettings to run tests, just mock the interface). Anyway I much like all three extensions, and welcome tight integration among them all, despite dev headaches that may occur. Tight coupling is not a solution it is a cause. [0, 1, 2, 3]. [0] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc947917.aspx [1] http://programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/212515/why-is-tight-coupling-between-functions-and-data-bad [2] http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-cq05227/index.html?ca=dnw-823 [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_coupling PS: Having said that, maybe it is not all that bad why not post to code as gist ( https://gist.github.com/). Cheers On 7/19/14, Yaron Koren ya...@wikiworks.com wrote: Hi, Well, it depends on what you mean by broken. From my perspective, as long as the code doesn't crash SMW's regular functionality, it's good enough. If there's a problem with the Site Settings functionality in SMW - even a severe problem - you could just redirect it as a Site Settings issue, which is really what it is. The same thing holds true for Page Schemas, by the way - the code in SMW that hooks into it is somewhat complex, but as far as I know it hasn't required any special maintenance effort on the part of SMW devs. -Yaron On Jul 18, 2014 9:30 AM, Jeroen De Dauw jeroended...@gmail.com wrote: Hey, Unfortunately, there isn't yet a public example of an extension that hooks into Site Settings Just from the description you provided, it is still not clear enough for me to say much about it. The general concern with putting it into SMW is that this forces the people working on SMW to hold it into account. This means making sure it does not get broken when changes are made on the master branch. That is hard to do since it requires the Site Settings extension. If the code is really trivial, then perhaps this is fine. Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw - http://www.bn2vs.com Software craftsmanship advocate Evil software architect at Wikimedia Germany ~=[,,_,,]:3 -- Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds ___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] Adding Site Settings support to SMW?
Hey, The same thing holds true for Page Schemas, by the way - the code in SMW that hooks into it is somewhat complex, but as far as I know it hasn't required any special maintenance effort on the part of SMW devs. As far as I'm concerned, we (SMW devs) are responsible to not break code in our repo, and to make sure the code we release is working properly. You can create an extension to SMW to avoid the problem. And if you do that, you can specify a compat range, and are not force to keep it working against master the whole time. Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw - http://www.bn2vs.com Software craftsmanship advocate Evil software architect at Wikimedia Germany ~=[,,_,,]:3 -- Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] Adding Site Settings support to SMW?
Hi James, I'm not a huge fan of such interdependencies (and AdminLinks is no exception). This seems like the most overriding of your objections. Could you elaborate on it? -- Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Re: [SMW-devel] Adding Site Settings support to SMW?
Hey, Perhaps we should move out the existing ones now we are switching to 2.0 anyway? The new mini extensions can be put in the suggests section. Or perhaps not, as for those to fully function, you'd first need package definitions of their dependencies as well. Thoughts? Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw - http://www.bn2vs.com Software craftsmanship advocate Evil software architect at Wikimedia Germany ~=[,,_,,]:3 -- Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds___ Semediawiki-devel mailing list Semediawiki-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
