Technically it should not cause any issue. The only think I can think of is some people expecting this id to be a XAR and trying to installi it.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:15 AM, Jean SIMARD <[email protected]> wrote: > OK, thank you for the precision. Just one last question on this topic: > is this relocation will cause any problem since the module > [application-forum] we are moving into a submodule > [application-forum-ui] will still exists (because [application-forum] > will be now the parent POM, not the XAR anymore). > Another way of saying it, we transform the original XAR > groupId/artifactId into a POM (and the sources of the XAR are moved into > another groupId/artifactId). > > Thanks, > > On 19/03/2015 10:54, [email protected] wrote: >> Hi Jean, >> >> On 19 Mar 2015 at 10:46:22, Jean SIMARD >> ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote: >> >>> OK, but if we don't keep track of the relocation of groupId/artifactId, >>> I wonder how you will be able to manage the upgrade (since it seems it >>> is a topic you and Vincent are interested in). Am I missing something? >>> Should I put this information in another way somewhere in the root POM >>> or in another file? >> >> Yes I wasn’t talking about Maven Relocation but about XWiki’s EM relocation >> (aka alias or extension features). >> >> This is how to indicate a relocation in our pom.xml: >> >> <properties> >> <xwiki.extension.features> >> <!-- Old names of this module used for retro compatibility when >> resolving dependencies of old extensions --> >> org.xwiki.platform:xwiki-platform-workspace-template-features >> </xwiki.extension.features> >> </properties> >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >> PS: Side note: I’ve never understood why Thomas decided to use the >> “features” terminology for relocation. Maybe you can explain what you had in >> mind Thomas? :) >> >>> Sincerely, >>> >>> On 19/03/2015 10:41, Thomas Mortagne wrote: >>>> Vincent was not really talking about Maven relocation specifically but >>>> simply how to EM can find the new version of an extension that changed >>>> its id. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Jean SIMARD wrote: >>>>> Hi Vincent, >>>>> >>>>> I'd like to have more precision on the "relocation" you're talking about. >>>>> >>>>> For example, we have this at the moment >>>>> >>>>> + application-forum >>>>> | + pom.xml >>>>> ->org.xwiki.contrib.forum:application-forum [xar] >>>>> >>>>> We'd like to transform the hierarchy of Maven modules/submodules into >>>>> the following structure >>>>> >>>>> + application-forum >>>>> | + pom.xml -> [pom] >>>>> | + application-forum-ui/ >>>>> | | + pom.xml -> [xar] >>>>> | + application-forum-test/ >>>>> | | + pom.xml -> [pom] >>>>> | | + application-forum-test-pageobjects/ >>>>> | | | + pom.xml -> [jar] >>>>> | | | + src/ >>>>> | | + application-forum-test-tests/ >>>>> | | | + pom.xml -> [jar] >>>>> | | | + src/ >>>>> >>>>> But now, I'm looking at relocation guide on Maven >>>>> >>>>> https://maven.apache.org/guides/mini/guide-relocation.html#How_to_relocate_a_Maven_2_artifact_to_a_different_groupId >>>>> >>>>> and I'm not sure of what I need to do. From the link, I understand that >>>>> I should do another pom.xml for each old release. Let say I will take >>>>> care only of the last release at the moment (1.9.3 for Forum App). Then >>>>> I should add a submodule to the root that looks like the following? >>>>> >>>>> + application-forum >>>>> | + pom.xml -> [pom] >>>>> | ... >>>>> | + application-forum-1.9.3 >>>>> | | + pom.xml -> [xar?] (see below for the content) >>>>> >>>>> pom.xml >>>>> ----- >>>>> >>>>> 4.0.0 >>>>> org.xwiki.contrib.forum >>>>> application-forum >>>>> 1.9.3 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> application-forum-ui >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> On 19/03/2015 09:08, [email protected] wrote: >>>>>> Hi Caty, >>>>>> >>>>>> See below. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 18 Mar 2015 at 19:29:17, Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) >>>>>> ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I want to write automated tests for some contrib applications, but I >>>>>>> need >>>>>>> you help on some questions. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> == Prb 1. Folder Structure + Changing IDs == >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Currently the majority of applications don't have modules. >>>>>> >>>>>> You mean submodules I guess since they’re a module (maven module) >>>>>> themselves. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Also some applications have IDs that don't correspond with the contrib >>>>>>> standard: sometimes wrong groupId like 'org.xwiki.contrib.forum', >>>>>>> sometimes >>>>>>> random artifactId. >>>>>> >>>>>> Why would ‘org.xwiki.contrib.forum’ be a wrong group id? >>>>>> >>>>>> The rule is defined here >>>>>> http://contrib.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#HHostingtools and a >>>>>> module can have org.xwiki.contrib or org.xwiki.contrib.. >>>>>> >>>>>>> When wanting to change the groupId for 'org.xwiki.contrib.forum' I was >>>>>>> told >>>>>>> that we should change it only if we have a very good reason, otherwise >>>>>>> changing the ID will resolve in upgrading problems within the Extension >>>>>>> Manager. Unfortunately I don't remember exactly the problem with the >>>>>>> changing of the ID, I just know I don't need to do it :) (//sorry >>>>>>> Thomas) >>>>>> >>>>>> We support relocation so the extension id (groupId+artifactId) can >>>>>> change. The only negative effect is that XWiki will not propose an >>>>>> upgrade automatically when the new version comes out with a new >>>>>> extensionId. (I’d love to brainstorm about finding ways to handle this >>>>>> with Thomas though). >>>>>> >>>>>>> Example: https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/application-forum >>>>>>> Theoretically, wanting to add tests I would need to create two modules: >>>>>>> - application-forum-test >>>>>>> - application-forum-ui, and move the current sources here. >>>>>>> Unfortunately this means a change in the ID. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are 'adding tests' a good reason to change the ID? >>>>>>> Should I not change the ID, and just add a test module? >>>>>>> - application-forum-test >>>>>>> - src/main/resources >>>>>> >>>>>> I’m in favor of changing the extension id and add relocation (it was >>>>>> done for this purpose). This is what we did in xwiki-platform for a lot >>>>>> of modules. >>>>>> >>>>>>> == Prb 2. Naming standards == >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have some conventions on contrib.xwiki.org about name of the project. >>>>>>> We should add maybe some more examples on groupId and artifactId. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also when looking at the test modules names, some applications have: >>>>>>> - {{full-repository-name}}-tests >>>>>>> - {{full-repository-name}}-test >>>>>>> - {{partial-repository-name}}-test >>>>>>> - {{random-repository-name}}-test >>>>>>> - test >>>>>> >>>>>> Where? AFAIK I’ve been the one doing most of the tests relocation in >>>>>> xwiki-platform and our naming rule has always been the same. For example: >>>>>> >>>>>> xwiki-platform-faq-test/ >>>>>> |_ xwiki-platform-faq-test-tests/ >>>>>> |_ … >>>>>> >>>>>>> Maybe we should agree also on this and document it. >>>>>>> I guess the correct name would be: >>>>>>> - {{full-repository-name}}-test >>>>>>> -- {{full-repository-name}}-test-pageobjects >>>>>>> -- {{full-repository-name}}-test-tests >>>>>>> - {{full-repository-name}}-ui >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes. Some conventions are already documented here: >>>>>> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HBuildBestPractices >>>>>> >>>>>>> Also if we are 'discovering' some applications that don't correspond to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> standard, do we change them or do we let them be? Since changing means a >>>>>>> change in the ID :P >>>>>> >>>>>> I’d say we change them. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Since in theory we should have automated tests for all our applications, >>>>>>> should we add a convention to always create a >>>>>>> - {{full-repository-name}}-ui ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes. This is what I do when I create a new "top level" module. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Additional question: Also when we will transfer from platform to >>>>>>> contrib, >>>>>>> are we going to rename the modules? >>>>>> >>>>>> I think we discussed this and we said we would change the id but not >>>>>> change the package names for now to not break backward compat. Would >>>>>> need to read again the mail thread. In any case we still have some >>>>>> decisions to make on that. I’ve been wanting to do this move but first I >>>>>> wanted to implement the cleanup/removal of xwiki-enterprise to make way >>>>>> for flavors. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> -Vincent >>>>>> >> _______________________________________________ >> devs mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs >> > > -- > Jean Simard > [email protected] > Research engineer at XWiki SAS > http://www.xwiki.com > Committer on the XWiki.org project > http://www.xwiki.org > _______________________________________________ > 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
