On 10/12/2011 03:42 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Sergiu Dumitriu<[email protected]> wrote: >> On 10/11/2011 10:04 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: >>> hi devs, >>> >>> The idea is that in Maven in general you should never embed anything >>> except for final distribution packages that are not supposed to be >>> used as dependencies of other maven projects (installers, standalone >>> packages, etc.). This will also allow us to properly setup >>> dependencies in xar so that dependency is installed when installing a >>> xar in Extension Manager without its pages being imported twice. >>> >>> So I propose the following changes: >>> * in xar plugin: >>> ** stop embedding dependencies as default behavior >> >> +1 >> >>> ** introduce an optional property for it. >> >> +0 >> >>> * in XE/XEM have two different xars: >>> ** a normal one with just XE pages and proper dependencies setup >>> ** a "standalone" one which embed all XE dependencies xar (basically >>> the one we have now) >> >> Not quite sure I like this. >> >> First, we're supposed to be moving documents out of xwiki-enterprise and >> into application modules inside the platform, so there shouldn't be any >> XE XAR at all, just a list of default dependencies to include in the >> standalone database. > > Yes we are supposed to be I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen in > 3.3 and IMO it's another subject. Also you forget some pages like > Main.WebHome that are still specific to XE and could not go in any > platform application IMO, everything in XEM is properly in application > located in platform but you still have some specific XEM pages. > >> >> Second, if we do push forward the extension manager as the preferred way >> of installing XARs, then such a bundle XAR shouldn't be needed at all. >> For the standalone distribution the packager plugin could just install >> the XE shallow XAR + its dependencies, while for WAR installs users >> could just pull it using the extension manager. So, the big fat XAR >> shouldn't have any use either. > > In the future of course but we are not ready for it right now. It's > not like I'm proposing to introduce a standalone package, it's already > here. Let's not rush it.
Indeed. So yes, for a quick fix for the moment, while waiting for better solutions, we do need the two packages. I wasn't -1, I was just a reluctant +0.5 knowing that there will be better options in the future. How do you envision this, implementation-wise? Two maven modules, one with documents the other as a bundle, or two build artifacts from the same module? >> >>> WDYT ? >>> >>> Here is my +1 >>> -- Sergiu Dumitriu http://purl.org/net/sergiu/ _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
