Hi, On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau < [email protected]> wrote:
> OK. > > I have chosen WikiManager for the UI and WikiManagerCode for resources used > by this UI. > This only makes sense for an application that creates entities, like the Blog application does. It has the Blog space where it stores its entry page and where it puts its newly created entities (blog posts) and <should> also <have> a BlogCode space where it puts code related pages so that we don`t mix code with content too much. However, an application like WikiManager that does not create entities (well it does, but it adds them to the XWiki space so you don`t have to worry about that; Also, I`m not sure if we should change that right now) so you are good with just one space where you will store the application's code + entry page. Vincent mentioned hidden pages, but I guess the topic was more about mixing code with content in the same space. We should document these 2 scenarios (regarding application entity creation) in the application best practices page. Thanks, Eduard > > -- > > I want to share you some news. > > I manage to transform the original Workspace UI to this new WikiManager UI. > I think I will have something nice during this day. > > The only thing that I don't have now is the template feature. My plan is to > do it as soon as I finish the UI aspect. > > My plan is to make a pull request with the whole work by the beginning of > the next week, to have all the new stuff included in 5.3M2. > > Then, I will write a lot of unit and functional tests until the final > release. > > I had to take some decisions. I hope you will like my work but since it > will be marked as @Unstable, we could still change things in 5.4! > > The only problem is that this pull request will be huge. 127 files are > modified. How should I send it? Several pull requests that each contains a > small part? > > WDYT? > > Louis-Marie > > > 2013/10/25 Thomas Mortagne <[email protected]> > > > I would prefer a different space too. > > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > On Oct 24, 2013, at 5:27 PM, Guillaume Louis-Marie Delhumeau < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi. > > >> > > >> In the past, the UI was stored in the "WikiManager" and in the > > >> "WorkspaceManager" spaces. > > >> > > >> Since, I am creating a new UI containing the 2 use-cases, and since it > > will > > >> be integrated by default, I am creating the new UI in the "XWiki" > space. > > >> > > >> Any objection? > > > > > > yes, the XWiki space should be avoided. Extensions should have their > own > > spaces in general. > > > > > > Thanks > > > -Vincent > > > > > >> Thanks, > > >> Louis-Marie > > >> > > >> > > >> 2013/10/23 Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau <[email protected]> > > >> > > >>> FYI, > > >>> > > >>> I managed to make the new API work on my local build. Before fixing > all > > >>> style violations and writing a lot of tests, I want to modify the > > >>> workspaces & wiki manager pages in order to have a clean UI. > > >>> > > >>> You can already see how the API looks like there: > > >>> > > >>> > > > https://github.com/gdelhumeau/xwiki-platform/tree/new-wiki-api/xwiki-platform-core/xwiki-platform-wiki > > >>> > > >>> BTW, It currently breaks the workspaces application, because the new > > API > > >>> remove the WorspaceManager.WorkspaceClass object from the server > pages. > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, > > >>> Louis-Marie > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> 2013/10/21 Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau <[email protected]> > > >>> > > >>>> FYI, I now use the new-wiki-api branch. > > >>>> https://github.com/gdelhumeau/xwiki-platform/tree/new-wiki-api > > >>>> > > >>>> I will delete all the others. > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> 2013/10/21 Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau <[email protected]> > > >>>> > > >>>>> 2013/10/11 Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Technical note: Looking at the code, I can`t see these > > >>>>>> WikiPropertyGroups > > >>>>>> being handled anywhere. I imagine that you would have to delegate > > the > > >>>>>> task > > >>>>>> of creating WikiDescriptor instances to the WikiManager which > will, > > in > > >>>>>> turn, be in charge of querying all the WikiPropertyGroupProviders > > and > > >>>>>> populating the new WikiDescriptor with these properties before > > >>>>>> returning it > > >>>>>> to the caller. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> You speak of WikiPropertyGroup as a storage location. However, in > > the > > >>>>>> code, > > >>>>>> I see that each provider is supposed to save the properties > itself, > > so > > >>>>>> it > > >>>>>> is in charge of picking a physical location for these properties > to > > be > > >>>>>> stored. The WikiDescriptor would only be a logical location where > > >>>>>> applications might store and read information/properties **about** > > the > > >>>>>> wiki. When an application would store a new property for a wiki > in a > > >>>>>> certain property group, that group's provider will be in charge of > > >>>>>> physically storing the value in the location where that group's > > >>>>>> properties > > >>>>>> are physically stored. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> It would be an interesting idea, but I find that it would be much > > more > > >>>>>> productive as a generic service of its own and not just limited to > > >>>>>> wikis. > > >>>>>> It is easy to imagine the need for such a service in the case of > > users. > > >>>>>> Applications might want to store/query properties for the current > > user, > > >>>>>> maybe for the current space and so on. For users, right now we`re > > >>>>>> storing > > >>>>>> stuff in the user profile. For wikis, we`d probably store it in > > >>>>>> XWikiPreferences, SpacePreferences for spaces and so on. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Maybe something a bit like what we do with ConfiguratinSource, but > > >>>>>> targeted > > >>>>>> on certain entities (wikis, users, etc) > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > > https://github.com/xwiki/xwiki-commons/blob/master/xwiki-commons-core/xwiki-commons-configuration/xwiki-commons-configuration-api/src/main/java/org/xwiki/configuration/ConfigurationSource.java > > >>>>>> ...however, what I don`t like about ConfigurationSource is that it > > is > > >>>>>> ReadOnly. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Would be a shame to spend the effort and not to make it a generic > > >>>>>> solution. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> WDYT? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> I think it is a good idea. But I won't have the time to do it for > > 5.3. > > >>>>> I want to continue on what I have already proposed, and we could > > still > > >>>>> make a generic solution after. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>> Louis-Marie > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
