Le 03/06/10 11:33, Vincent Massol a écrit :
We should avoid having one application per macro, otherwise it's going to be a mess. I think we should categorize the wiki macros so that we have one application by big category.On Jun 3, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:Hi devs, We have avoided this discussion but it's time to settle it. We need to decide if there are candidate macros that we should write as wiki macros in our default XE distribution. And if so what are the rule for deciding whether a macro should be written as a wiki macro or as a java macro. Some ideas: - java macros are much easier to test - java macros are easier to develop since you have a full-fledged IDE (debugging, syntax coloring, code validation, etc) - java macros can obey styling rule, such as checkstyle passing - wiki macros can be removed so users can't be sure the wiki macro will always be there since it's only provided with the default XAR Proposal ======= - If the macro is a generic macro then it should be written as a Java macro - If the macro is application-specific (for ex a macro specific to the Blog application) then it can be written as a Wiki macro WDYT?ok, I've been convinced that there's no simple solution and thus that we need to decide whether a macro should be implemented in java or as a wiki page on a case by case basis. Thus I propose that when a macro is implemented as a wiki macro, we put in SVN in platform/applications as an application by itself (ie a XAR). In the same manner as java macros are a JAR by themselves.
Ludovic
WDYT? Thanks -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
-- Ludovic Dubost Blog: http://blog.ludovic.org/ XWiki: http://www.xwiki.com Skype: ldubost GTalk: ldubost
<<attachment: ludovic.vcf>>
_______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
