On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 16:27, Jerome Velociter <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > Thanks Denis for raising this again, it's indeed a pretty annoying issue > > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Thomas Mortagne > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 15:57, Denis Gervalle <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Devs, >>> >>> Anyone of you will surely agree that the hidden document feature implemented >>> in the store is very bad. >> >> The way this "feature" is implemented should never have been accepted, >> it just broke an API for something that is not really related to >> storage... >> >> See http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-3925 and its dependencies. >> >>> IMO, it has never been fully implemented, probably in the hope of a better >>> way to go, and it is so for too long. I think it is the time to take some >>> decision about it, or I do not see the direction and I do not understand >>> where we want to go ? >>> >>> I see 3 possibilities: >>> 1) we remove it and found other way to solve the problem it solves, which >>> are currently limited to the Blog, ColorThemes and Panels applications in a >>> standard XE. >> >> +1 >> >>> 2) we keep it as it is, since it could be hard to implement higher in the >>> current implementation, but then we need to fix the places where it cause >>> issues. >> >> -1, I can see it as a long term solution. It's something to say we >> will fix it latter it's something else to validate it. Adding a >> boolean to searchDocument as indicated in >> http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-3925 would already be a lot >> better than the current situation. > > Yes... Even if a lot of extensions/snippet will have to be changed to > set that boolean (copy space, selective export, etc.)
Why ? What I proposed exactly in the jira issue was to have that boolean to true by default which the current behavior. > > Jerome > >> >>> 3) we implement the feature using another method ? >> >> I don't fully understand what is the difference between 1) and 3). >> >>> >>> If we choose 1), early in 3.x release is the probably best moment for it, >>> since it is a breakage in compatibility, I am -0 on this however. >>> >>> If we choose 2), we need to make it work properly by fixing places where we >>> need to include all document, including hidden one. I have some old patch to >>> the application-manager to export hidden document (ie: currently the blog >>> application does not export properly), to the skinx plugin that does not >>> apply 'always' skin extensions contained in hidden document, and there is >>> probably other places. >>> >>> If we choose 3) now, what do you proposed to better implement it. I have >>> read some comments that it was a UI level stuff implemented at the store >>> level, but I do not see how it could be done better in the current >>> implementation. >>> >>> Moreover, if we keep the feature, I think that it should be exposed somehow >>> to the admins, allowing the creation of hidden document, but also listing >>> them, deleting them properly, etc... Concerning the document provided with >>> XE, I also wonder what could be the rules for hiding them or not ? Why not >>> also hidding stock document in the XWiki space, just keeping users and some >>> top level documents ? >>> >>> WDYT ? >>> >>> -- >>> Denis Gervalle >>> SOFTEC sa - CEO >>> eGuilde sarl - CTO >>> _______________________________________________ >>> devs mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Thomas Mortagne >> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > -- Thomas Mortagne _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
