Hi Vincent, On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi devs, > > Now that we're starting to use the Extension Manager (EM) we need to be > careful about the Description and Names we use in our pom.xml since they're > used by the EM to display information to the user. They're also used by the > XR application to import extensions located in maven repository into > extensions.xwiki.org (EXO). > > Right now our names are of the type shown here: > https://gist.github.com/2311321 > > For example: > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - Parent POM ............ SUCCESS [0.004s] > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - API ................... SUCCESS [2.066s] > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - Handler - Parent POM .. SUCCESS [0.017s] > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - Handler - JAR ......... SUCCESS [0.133s] > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - Repository - Parent POM SUCCESS > [0.004s] > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - Repository - Aether ... SUCCESS [0.132s] > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - Repository - XWiki .... SUCCESS [0.006s] > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - Repository - XWiki model SUCCESS > [0.188s] > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - Repository - XWiki api SUCCESS [0.010s] > [INFO] XWiki Commons - Extension - Repository - XWiki handler SUCCESS > [0.024s] > > These names are not nice names for users. Actually they're more IDs than > names. And having the users see those in our livetable on EXO isn't nice > for example. Nor is it nice if they see them in the EM UI. > > I thus propose that we change the way we use names in our pom.xml to use > English-readable names, without any "XWiki" prefix. > > For example, for the example show above we could have: > > Extensions > Extension API > Extension Handlers > JAR Extension Handler > Extension Repositories > Aether Extension Repository > XWiki Extension Repository > XWiki Extension Repository Model > XWiki Extension Repository API > XWiki Extension Repository Handler > I`m not trilled at all about seeing this in my maven console. We lose any (1) consistency of display and (2) module membership. (1) is pretty obvious since "Extensions" is at plural (and misleading btw, since it's just a parent module), "Extension API" is at singular, "JAR Extension Handler" is not prefixed by the module and so on. Plus, imagine if the extensions view is sorted by extension name (not currently implemented). About (2), I consider it to be useful extremely to a user to get an idea from a glance of where that "thing" (that his extension is or depends on) actually is and where it comes from. If you look at the other 3rd party extenions, you will see "Commons X" (ok, module X comes from Commons -- "Commons BeanUtils"), "Jetty :: X" (ok, module X comes from Jetty -- "Jetty :: IO Utility") and so on. I understand that this can be seen as a maven limitation, but all the other projects are working around it like we also did. On the other hand, projects like Commons are library projects that have pretty much a flat structure (<Project Name> <Module Name>). Since in XWiki pretty much everything is an extension, the Core Extensions section (EM UI) will be flooded with xwiki modules which are pretty complex in hierarchy and which will confuse the user when they are all displayed on the same level. I`m -0, towards -1 on the initial proposal. If we really think that we have a problem on this area, I propose that we introduce a convention for module names that both displays module membership but does not overdo it (a combination of what you propose and what we currently have): <ProjectName> - <Feature/ModuleName> - <SubModulePrettyName> Example: XWiki Commons - Extension - API XWiki Commons - Extension - Aether Repository XWiki Commons - Extension - XWiki Repository Model XWiki Commons - Extension - XWiki Repository Handler XWiki Platform - Annotations - UI XWiki Platform - Blog <-- has no submodule XWiki Rendering - Macro - HTML etc. The main idea was to make sure that we don`t have any extra levels in <SubModulePrettyName>. IMO, 3 levels is decent from a user's POV and should be enough for devs when structuring their code. If you think about it, that`s pretty much what we already do in the maven project structure. If the extensions view only displayed XWiki extensions (without 3rd party modules from other projects) then your initial proposal would have been relevant from the user's POV (though still not good for developers). Maven is at hart a development tool. Yes, we`ve decided to reuse it on the user side as well, but we should not trade a working dev practice for a pretty name that will not even be useful to the user anyway. I fail to envision a practical usecase for the development process where the maven console displays pretty names. It will just be a string blob that will make things harder. WDYT? P.S.: I`m +0 for the new proposal, since I am quite happy with the current setup. Thanks, Eduard > The alternative is to introduce a custom property in our pom.xm that would > be used by the EM and XR but that's not a good solution because it means > even more maintenance work. > > While not using technical id as names in our pom.xml is not as nice when > displayed in the Maven Reactor I feel it's still the best solution we have. > > Here's my +1 > > Thanks > -Vincent > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
