I go with Option A. Thanks,
2016-11-17 16:24 GMT+01:00 Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]>: > +1 for moving even more of the functionality in Java, not just this > listener. > > On 11/17/2016 07:00 AM, Guillaume Delhumeau wrote: > > Hi. > > > > The Blog Application is one of our main applications. It has been fully > > written in Velocity, so that even users who don't have programing rights > > can install it on their wiki. > > > > However, I am currently working on XWIKI-13861 [1]. It is about marking > the > > blog documents as hidden when they are not "published" so that visitors > > won't find them by mistake with the search engine. To accomplish it, I've > > created a listener that change the document visibility when a blog post > is > > saved. > > > > To implement this listener, we have 2 options, with both benefits and > > drawbacks: > > > > A: Write the listener with Java and introduce an xwiki-platform-blog-api > > module. > > =========================================================== > > > > Pros: > > * It follows our Best Practices. > > * We use a nice and powerful language: Java. > > > > Cons: > > * It make the Blog Application dependent to a Java Module, so the wiki > > administrator needs the PR to install it if the JAR is not already > > installed in the WAR. > > * Note that this JAR would be bundled in the XE's WAR while the Blog > > Application is part of the main wiki flavor, so XE users won't see the > > change right now. > > > > B: Write the listener with Groovy directly on a wiki page. > > ========================================== > > > > Pros: > > * Blog Application remains a full XAR extension that you can install > > without PR, as it has always been. > > > > Cons: > > * We need to use the groovy macro, which is not consistent with our Best > > Practices. > > * We need a bit of plumbing to register the listener (what we really need > > is to be able to write listeners easily with an XObject). > > * If the user has not the PR, the listener will not be registered, so the > > new behavior introduced by XWIKI-13861 won't be applied. It's a kind of > > nice degradation but we need to explain it to the user, which will be > > technical and not user-friendly (we already have lacks on this domain). > > > > C: Don't write a listener, but make all changes in Velocity > > ========================================= > > > > Pros: > > * It remains a full XAR extension. > > * No degradation > > > > Cons: > > * We need to make the business logic of hiding the blog document in a > > velocity service and in the blog post sheet. > > * It is less safe than the listener because a user can still change the > > "hidden" and the "published" values of the XObjects and bypass the > > synchronization. > > * We cannot write an automatic migrator that would be executed only on > wiki > > events. > > > > Conclusion > > ======== > > > > My preference goes to A, because: > > * I don't really like the degradation principle for technical reasons > that > > the user might not understand. > > * It's simple & safe. > > * If I would have written the Blog App myself, I would have made a Script > > Service in Java to put the business logic away from Velocity. > > * We have plenty of extensions having Java modules. A better approach > would > > be to authorize the installation of approved and/or signed modules even > > when the admin has not the programming right. > > > > Since we need a collegial decision, I am asking you your opinion :) > > > > Thanks, > > > > [1] http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-13861 > > > > > -- > Sergiu Dumitriu > http://purl.org/net/sergiu > _______________________________________________ > 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
