On 30 Sep 2015 at 11:30:16, Guillaume Lerouge 
([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote:

> Hi,
>  
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>  
> > 2015-09-30 10:58 GMT+02:00 [email protected] :
> >
> > >
> > > On 30 Sep 2015 at 10:53:48, Thomas Mortagne ([email protected]
> > > (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think what I like best is some option in the refactoring API to
> > > > indicate that you want to delete only final documents in the space (so
> > > > skipping space home page and spaces).
> > >
> > > That could be interesting for some use cases but it’s risky for this one.
> > > Several apps may generate terminal pages and users could create terminal
> > > pages in app spaces too. So that would not just remove the app technical
> > > pages, it could remove more.
> > >
> >
> > The idea of Thomas is an option to only delete *terminal* pages located in
> > the space with a depth of 1. Said differently, the direct and terminal
> > children of the page.
> >
> > This way, you can delete all data located in the space without removing the
> > code (because the code would be located in a deeper depth), but it works
> > only if the app generates data as terminal pages. It is the case right now,
> > but new apps should work differently and create their data as regular
> > Nested Pages.
> >
> > That is why I don't think it's the correct way to go.
> >
> > We need this option: delete this page and its children *except* the "Code"
> > page and its children. This option could be proposed by the app itself, as
> > a "clean data" functionality.
> >
>  
> From an interface point of view, this could be solved with a treeview when
> clicking on delete.
>  
> "This action will delete the page and all of its children, as displayed
> below. Please uncheck pages you don't want to see deleted.”

Yes, I like this, a LT might be better for filtering things though.

Thanks
-Vincent

>  
> Thanks,
>  
> Guillaume
>  
>  
> > The other solution is to not change the current best practices and let the
> > code in an other space.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > -Vincent
> > >
> > > > On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:29 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 30 Sep 2015 at 10:28:54, Thomas Mortagne (
> > [email protected]
> > > (mailto:[email protected])) wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:22 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > >> > Hi Denis,
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On 30 Sep 2015 at 09:49:28, Denis Gervalle ([email protected](mailto:
> > > [email protected])) wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> Well, I have not yet look in details the new features for page
> > > > >> >> manipulation, but I was wondering if there will be a simple way
> > to
> > > delete
> > > > >> >> application data without deleting the application itself with the
> > > model you
> > > > >> >> propose ?
> > > > >> >> I know there is already issue with that about the WebHome which
> > > > >> >> is usually an entry point to the application, but deleting a
> > space
> > > was
> > > > >> >> possible. If the code is nested under the data, isn't it an
> > issue.
> > > It looks
> > > > >> >> like the opposite of the general way (not xwiki way, but in
> > > application in
> > > > >> >> general), where the code abstract more or less the location of
> > the
> > > data and
> > > > >> >> is the "main" part.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> So, I am not sure actually, that this is the best way. Maybe code
> > > and data
> > > > >> >> should be side by side under a entry point documents ?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > You mean something like:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > MyApp
> > > > >> > |_ Data/
> > > > >> > |_ Code/
> > > > >> > |_ WebHome
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > (Instead of leaving it free for apps to decide where to put the
> > > data they generate)
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > We could indeed standardize on the location of where an app puts
> > > the data it generates in a “Data" space.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The problem with that is the forced /Data/ part of the URL which is
> > > > >> really not nice.
> > > > >
> > > > > Good point, that’s a no go IMO.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > -Vincent
> > > > >
> > > > >> > Even without this, to remove an app you’d simply remove the Code/
> > > space (+ the WebHome).
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > So your proposal of a standardized Data directory doesn’t
> > > contradict my proposal, it’s actually an additional proposal, so I guess
> > > you agree about the 2 rules? (you didn’t mention anything about rule 2).
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Thanks!
> > > > >> > -Vincent
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 8:22 AM, [email protected]
> > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> > Ping! There’s only Thomas and Gaby who answered so far :)
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > Thanks
> > > > >> >> > -Vincent
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > On 27 Sep 2015 at 21:19:43, [email protected] (
> > > [email protected]) wrote:
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > Hi devs,
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > Following our implementation of NS/NP in 7.2 I’d like to
> > propose
> > > 2 new
> > > > >> >> > best practices for app dev that we would list at
> > > > >> >> >
> > >
> > http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/ApplicationDevelopmentBestPractices
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > 1) New rule 1: “Code” subspace
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > Current text:
> > > > >> >> > * Generally, put all your pages in a single space dedicated for
> > > the
> > > > >> >> > application you're developing (e.g. Faq, Scheduler, IRC,
> > > AppWithinMinutes,
> > > > >> >> > etc). The name must be as short as possible while still being
> > > > >> >> > understandable of course and without overusing abbreviations.
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > New version:
> > > > >> >> > * Generally, put all your pages in a single space dedicated for
> > > the
> > > > >> >> > application you're developing (e.g. Faq, Scheduler, IRC,
> > > AppWithinMinutes,
> > > > >> >> > etc). The name must be as short as possible while still being
> > > > >> >> > understandable of course and without overusing abbreviations.
> > > > >> >> > * Technical pages should be put in a subspace named “Code”
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > Note: this rule can only be applied for new applications for
> > now
> > > since the
> > > > >> >> > EM doesn’t know how to follow renames currently so for example
> > > if I move
> > > > >> >> > pages from the FAQCode space to the FAQ.Code space, when EM
> > > upgrades the
> > > > >> >> > app, it’ll display all pages in FAQCode as deleted (basically
> > it
> > > considers
> > > > >> >> > all pages in FAQ.Code as new pages and pages in FAQCode as
> > > deleted pages).
> > > > >> >> > Note: I’ve created http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-12622
> > for
> > > this.
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > 2) New rule 2:
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > * Technical pages without children must be terminal pages.
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > WDYT?
> > > > >> >> >
> > > > >> >> > Thanks
> > > > >> >> > -Vincent
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Guillaume Delhumeau ([email protected])
> > Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS
> > Committer on the XWiki.org project
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

Reply via email to