On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Aug 28, 2012, at 3:44 PM, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:35 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Aug 28, 2012, at 3:31 PM, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Thomas Mortagne >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Aug 28, 2012, at 2:50 PM, Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Aug 28, 2012, at 1:15 PM, Thomas Mortagne >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi guys, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I would like to modify a bit the Maven XAR plugin to add in the >>>>>>>>> package.xml some extension related informations like the extension id >>>>>>>>> and version at the very least. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Why not package the pom.xml instead in META-INF/maven/* as it's done >>>>>>>> by the Maven JAR plugin? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because it's not supposed as part of XAR format by existing XAR >>>>>>> parser, you will get an error because it will fail to parse it as a >>>>>>> document. The proposal here is to use something that already exists, >>>>>>> does not break anything and is very easy to do. >>>>>> >>>>>> I personally much prefer to add META-INF support over changing the >>>>>> package.xml format because it's much better aligned with all other >>>>>> formats like JAR, EAR, WAR, etc and with the way we handle JAR >>>>>> extensions. >>>>> >>>>> I think you don't understand what I mean here. The issue is not that >>>>> it's complex to support it, adding support in 4.2 for META-INF will >>>>> not change the fact that you will get an error in older version with >>>>> your XAR. >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It doesn't look complex to add either, it's a matter of excluding >>>>>> META-INF files from the parser and to use the Maven Archiver (see >>>>>> http://maven.apache.org/shared/maven-archiver/). >>>> >>>> Making the XAR format depends on Maven is not exactly something >>>> generic or even very nice. Core extension scanner is looking at the >>>> pom located in jar file among other things in order to find as much as >>>> it can but lets not forget that this is a hack and nothing else. >>> >>> Whatever the solution we need consistency IMO. If your proposal is to >>> create an extension.xml file located in META-INF/xwiki and that we would >>> put in all our extension types then I'm all for it too. >>> >>> I don't like mixing extension information with packaging information. For >>> me package.xml shouldn't contain extension information. >> >> It's exactly the same thing. The package.xml file is the XAR way to >> provide informations about the file and is generated from the pom.xml. >> It already provide the a subset of extension informations (name, >> version, license, etc.) so the proposal here is about adding more >> things. > > For me the package.xml should probably even be removed or at least a lot of > information should be removed. There's no point in listing the files > explicitly for example. Same for whether it's a backup pack or not. > > And a lot of the information currently in package.xml should be moved to > META-INF/xwiki/extension.xml such as author, license, version, name, > description. > > So I'm definitely with you about creating a XWiki-specific descriptor (not > tied to maven) located in META-INF/xwiki/extension.xml for all our > extensions, but beefing up package.xml goes in the wrong direction IMO. > > At the very least I'd like that we agree about where we'd like to go (I've > made a proposal with META-INF/xwiki/extension.xml) and then discuss how to > get there and what it takes. If it means going through intermediary steps, > then fine, the important part for me being to agree on where we want to go.
Maybe but that's a different subject and IMO it sounds like creating a new packaging format for wiki pages. I need something for 4.2 and adding the id in package.xml along with the other existing extension informations is quick, easy, fully retro compatible and does not really introduce anything new. > > Thanks > -Vincent > >>> Thanks >>> -Vincent >>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> -Vincent >>>>>> >>>>>>>> It would be more generic and similar to how JARs are handled. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>> -Vincent >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The idea is to be able to know what a XAR is exactly like we have the >>>>>>>>> pom.xml packaged with the jar file for example. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Among other things it will cover the following use cases: >>>>>>>>> * when someone import a XAR with the standard UI, automatically >>>>>>>>> register it in the extension index if it happen to be an extension >>>>>>>>> (i.e. if we find extension informations in its package.xml) >>>>>>>>> * wiki manager and workspaces can properly register actual extension >>>>>>>>> when creating their default template from a XAR the first time (this >>>>>>>>> is for example required to be able to upgrade a farm with EM where >>>>>>>>> pretty much all the wiki as been created from this default template) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In both cases the idea is to support as much current behaviours as we >>>>>>>>> can and still be able to use the full power of Extension Manager. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There should not be any backward compatibility issue here since it >>>>>>>>> does not really change anything in the XAR structure. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> WDYT ? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Here is my +1 > _______________________________________________ > 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
