On 01/31/2010 08:31 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea wrote: > Hi devs, > > I'd like to split the wysiwyg module in two: > > xwiki-gwt-editor : All the client side except the editor initialization > code. This module should depend only on xwiki-gwt-dom and > xwiki-gwt-user. As a consequence, anyone should be able to inherit this > module and reuse the editor outside XWiki. All the editor plugins are > included but we don't enforce their use. This means that external > parties can assemble whichever plugins they want and only those plugins > will be compiled into JavaScript. Some plugins use services. External > parties have to implement this services if they want to use the plugin. > > xwiki-gwt-editor-xwiki : XWiki-specific client initialization code plus > all the server side (i.e. the XWiki implementation of plugin services). > This module will depend on xwiki-gwt-editor and XWiki platform. > > All this is quite easy to do, except one thing. Plugin services are > treated as components by XWiki which means service interfaces have to be > annotated as component roles. This adds a dependency on > xwiki-component-api to xwiki-gwt-editor. I see two options: > > (1) Keep the annotations and thus the dependency. This requires no > effort but will make the editor less reusable for those who want to > implement the services in a different way, using a different component > manager for instance. > > (2) Remove the component role annotations and add some code to > xwiki-gwt-editor-xwiki that dynamically registers as component roles at > XWiki startup all the interfaces extending RemoteService (all GWT > services must extend this interface). I'm not sure this is possible > because components defined in components.txt are looked up earlier. > Vincent, WDYT? > > We can improve later the organization and maybe split xwiki-gwt-editor > in multiple modules, but for now this is the quickest way to make the > editor reusable. I'm ready to do the split as soon as we agree on the > details. WDYT?
+1. Splitting into small modules would be good, too, since it allows to choose which features will be available at runtime during the build process, so that the binaries aren't bloated with unwanted features. The downside is that the dependency list will be long. So, we could already go in this direction by putting all the current modules into a "bulk" submodule, and extract one by one the features into their own submodule. -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
