On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have re-read the original thread and scanned the remarks done by Denis > and I have to say that I kind of agree with him on some aspects (or at > least with what I understood from his message since I scanned it quite > quickly). > > Basically, I also don`t see much point/value in splitting the code into > multiple repositories. IMO, we should only have the xwiki and the contrib > organisations and move as much as possible from xwiki to contrib, i.e. move > what you call "vertical" extensions to contrib, where everybody can easily > contribute like they would to any other extension. > > In terms or differentiating between quality, it should just be a matter of > community feedback and what the community values to be of quality or not. > In other words: ratings, votes, likes, whatever. > > The community does not hit the code repositories first to look at where the > code is located, but the other way around. A user first hits the XWiki > Extensions repository (extensions.xwiki.org) or the Extension Manager UI > where he is interested on searching for his needs and deciding based on > ratings, community feedback, featured extensions, etc. which result is best > for him. > > IMO, raising the administrative complexity of the community will not help > us work faster/better and will not simplify the contribution process for > outsiders, but rather the opposite. > > Additionally, there is nothing stopping us, or anybody else for the matter, > from setting up additional extension repositories where only hand-picked > extensions are published and where users can get certain levels of > guarantees on quality, support, etc. But, like Denis say saying, this is > about the artefacts, not about the sources. > > If we are worried about people from contrib making bad commits on > high-profile contrib extensions, we can easily revert and warn the > misbehaving user. On 3 strikes he's out. Personally, I find this much > simpler and in line with our wishes to simplify administrative tasks (and a > bit in line with what we have done for jira where we are giving users more > power in handling issues). > > Thanks, > Eduard >
> P.S.: A reminder to whoever will be doing the moving of code from one repo > to another: please! reference the source repository and the source commit > ID so that when we use blaim we don`t reach a dead end. Specially if there > is no jira issue to track the move, the history is lost to oblivion. (I > know it is technically still there, but it's almost impossible to find) Actually on that subject what I do is copying the history (using the great "git subtree" extension). See https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/xwiki-platform-cache-oscache that I moved recently for example. > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Gabriela Smeria <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hello Vincent, >> >> Here's my +1 for this proposal. >> I strongly agree with one change, because I also had it in mind for a while >> now. And that is: moving the "vertical" modules out of the xwiki github >> organization repos, since it would be easier for contributors to >> participate in improving and/or adding extensions and also, IMO, it will >> decrease the build time. >> >> Thanks, >> Gabriela >> >> *Gabriela Smeria* >> *Web Developer* >> [email protected] >> skype: smeria.gabriela >> >> On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 8:43 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > I’d like to progress with this idea so let me summarize this thread’s >> > discussion so far: >> > >> > * +1 from Thomas, Guillaume, Caty and Marius >> > * No answer from Edy on whether he’s ok with the proposal or not. Edy? :) >> > * Denis seems negative about it but I agree with Thomas’s reply in that >> > the points raised by Denis do not concern this discussion. Denis >> commented >> > about publishing and installing Extensions, whereas this proposal was >> only >> > about a location for storing some extensions. Extensions can be developed >> > anywhere and don’t have to go into this new proposed location. Denis, >> could >> > you please review this new proposal with this in mind? >> > * There were discussions about the name and devs express doubts about >> > using xwiki-contrib-sandbox. >> > >> > I’d like to progress so here’s my second proposal. It differs from the >> > first proposal on the following points: >> > >> > * All our code is contributed so I don’t think we need to emphasize this >> > point and I don’t think we need to have “contrib” in the name of the >> github >> > repos. This will lead to shorter names which is better. >> > * I propose to have 3 github org: >> > ** xwiki-core (currently “xwiki” but we should probably rename it - >> Github >> > will create redirects and the only downside is that we need to check it >> out >> > for making repo changes) >> > ** xwiki-extensions (new). For maintained and good quality level >> > extensions, following the charter defined in the first proposal (we’ll >> tune >> > it). Committers are added extension by extension and will be voted on the >> > devs list for now, by the xwiki core devs (we’ll tune that later on) >> > ** xwiki-incubator (currently “xwiki-contrib” but we should rename it). >> > Extensions in xwiki-extensions that are no longer working with the latest >> > LTS and that nobody is fixing will move back to xwiki-incubator too. >> > * I propose to change the goal of the contrib.xwiki.org wiki and to >> > expand its goal. Right now it’s focused about the xwiki-contrib >> > organization on GitHub. I propose to make it the wiki that explains how >> to >> > make contributions to the XWiki ecosystem in general. We would move >> > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/Contributing + add pages >> > for explaining how to contribute to xwiki-core, xwiki-extensions and >> > xwiki-incubator. >> > * ATM we should continue to use the “org.xwiki.contrib" groupid for code >> > in the xwiki-incubator and xwiki-extensions organizations. Ideally we >> > should use org.xwiki.extension but it’s already used by the Extension >> > module in xwiki-core. An option would have been to use org.xwiki.core for >> > the core but that would break too much code so the only option is to keep >> > having a special prefix for non-core code. Other ideas: >> > “org.xwiki.module”, “org.xwiki.ext”, “org.xwiki.external”, >> “org.xwiki.addon”. >> > The simplest is to keep “org.xwiki.contrib” I think, WDYT? >> > >> > Once (and if) we agree on this, I’d like to quickly move some existing >> > extensions from the xwiki-core organization into xwiki-extensions, >> starting >> > with the FAQ Application, in order to start testing this new >> organization. >> > >> > WDYT? >> > >> > Thanks >> > -Vincent >> > >> > On 3 Dec 2014 at 15:58:36, [email protected] ([email protected] >> (mailto: >> > [email protected])) wrote: >> > >> > > Hi committers (and devs in general), >> > > >> > > I’m submitting to you this idea, to try to improve the xwiki open >> source >> > project and to give it a new dynamism. I believe the topics discussed >> below >> > are made even more important since we’re soon going to develop the notion >> > of flavors in XWiki. >> > > >> > > Note that this proposal obsoletes the >> > http://markmail.org/message/4hglttljiio5v2km proposal (i.e. the move of >> > some extensions in the xwiki github organization), which itself was >> > obsoleting http://markmail.org/message/ppw2slpgqou2ihai >> > > >> > > Issues to solve >> > > =============== >> > > >> > > * The scope of the code maintained by the XWiki Dev Team (== the xwiki >> > github organization) is increasing but the team stays relatively small >> > > * The more stuff we move into the repos of the xwiki github >> > organization, the less easy it is for non-“XWiki Dev Team” committers to >> > participate and we want more contributions >> > > >> > > Proposed solution >> > > ================= >> > > >> > > Executive summary: >> > > * Reduce the scope of all the code located in the xwiki github >> > organization by only keeping “core” modules >> > > * A “core" module is defined by being a generic transversal module >> (i.e. >> > that can be used in lots of XWiki flavors, if not all). This is opposed >> to >> > “vertical” modules which are modules specific of a usage of XWiki. >> > > ** Examples of “core" modules: logging module, configuration module, >> > distribution wizard, statistics application, annotations, active >> installs, >> > one base flavor (the “XWiki” flavor), etc >> > > ** Example of “vertical” modules: meeting manager application, blog >> > application, FAQ application, flavors (except the base flavor), etc >> > > >> > > Some consequences: >> > > * We need a new location for several modules that would go out of the >> > xwiki github organization repos >> > > * It would be good to separate sandbox extensions from 1st class >> > extensions that are maintained and developed following best practices. We >> > need some way to maintain the quality of important extensions >> > > >> > > Detailed Implementation: >> > > * The “xwiki” github organization’s description becomes “XWiki Core” >> > (it’s too complex to rename the org to “xwiki-core” IMO) >> > > * “XWiki Dev Team” becomes the “XWiki Core Team” (and committers in >> > there are called “XWiki Core Committers”). >> > > * “xwiki-contrib” is split into 2 github organizations (technically we >> > rename it to “xwiki-contrib-sandbox”): >> > > ** “xwiki-contrib-sandbox” (or “xwiki-incubator”), where newly proposed >> > extensions or abandoned extensions are located >> > > ** “xwiki-contrib-extensions”, where maintained extensions are located. >> > > * These 2 organizations are commonly referred to as “XWiki Contrib" >> > > * Same as now, anyone requesting a repo in xwiki-contrib-sandbox would >> > be granted one and he/she’d be given write access to all repos in the >> > xwiki-contrib-sandbox organization. >> > > * We define some rules for graduating from xwiki-contrib-sandbox to >> > xwiki-contrib-extensions. For example: >> > > ** The extension should have been in xwiki-contrib-sandbox at least 6 >> > months (this gives time to see if the extension is maintained during that >> > time and will survive the test of time - most extensions will die in the >> > first months) >> > > ** The extension should have had more than 2 releases and be published >> > on extensions.xwiki.org(http://extensions.xwiki.org) with documentation >> > > ** The extension should work with the latest LTS version of XWiki + the >> > latest stable version of XWiki (right now that would be 5.4.5 + 6.3). >> Note >> > that if the extension has to use new API it’s ok that it doesn’t work on >> > the latest LTS. >> > > ** Generally follow the practices defined at http://dev.xwiki.org >> > > * Each extension in xwiki-extensions has a leader/maintainer. He/she’s >> > the one proposing to move the extension from xwiki-sandbox to >> > xwiki-extensions. He/she’s responsible for ensuring that the extension >> gets >> > regular releases and is maintained in general. He/she defines initially >> the >> > list of committers in his email proposal for moving the extension. >> > > * We create a PMC (Project Management Committee) for XWiki Contrib, >> > generally in charge of both xwiki-contrib-sandbox and >> > xwiki-contrib-extensions (voting new extensions in >> > xwiki-contrib-extensions, vote new PMC members, etc). To bootstrap it, I >> > would send a mail on devs@ asking who’s interested to be part of this >> > committee. I expect some core committers + some contrib committers to >> stand >> > up. >> > > * Contrib extensions keep using the org.xwiki.contrib package name and >> > groupid as currently defined at http://contrib.xwiki.org >> > > >> > > Note: The idea is that xwiki core is developed as a team maintaining >> all >> > code in there, xwiki contrib is developed extension by extension (each >> > extension is an island). This allows anyone to propose extensions in >> XWiki >> > Contrib without the need for everyone to support them. >> > > >> > > WDYT? >> > > >> > > 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 >> > _______________________________________________ > 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
