On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 6:47 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <ser...@xwiki.org> wrote:
> Users are very bad at reading or following instructions. It's likely > that they will download the file, double click it, and expect it to be > installed automatically. > > If the extension is .zip, then the OS will silently unpack it, and the > user won't know what to do next. But since at least something happened, > they might actually think that the file installed itself, then wonder > why it still doesn't work. > > If the extension is something special, then the OS won't know what to do > with it, and present a dialog warning that the file can't be opened, and > the user is more likely to search for information about how that file > can be installed. > > The downside of it not being a .zip file is that when the user should > unzip it, it's a bit more difficult to do it. > > > +1 for .xip, it seems that nobody else is using it. > Indeed I was not sure where to look for this. I checked quickly on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_filename_extensions_(S%E2%80%93Z)#X but it did not felt like the right reference :) So +1 for xip too. > > https://fileinfo.com/extension/xip > > On 05/02/2017 10:43 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: > > > >> On 2 May 2017, at 16:36, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.morta...@xwiki.com> > wrote: > >> > >> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 4:28 PM, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>>> On 2 May 2017, at 16:05, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.morta...@xwiki.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi devs, > >>>> > >>>> I'm currently working on a new package format to package a bunch of > >>>> extensions into a single file. > >>>> > >>>> The first use case is to make offline install easier. We can't count > on > >>> all > >>>> in one XAR anymore (plus all in one XAR prduces very crappy > extensions) > >>> so > >>>> I was thinking about providing a generic package containing all the > >>>> extensions you need in it. It will simply be a zip containing > extensions > >>> in > >>>> the same format than Extension Manager local repository so that you > can > >>>> unzip it it there (or later use some UI to "import" it). > >>>> > >>>> So now I need a name for this new package. Since extension descriptor > >>> file > >>>> extension is "xed" (for "XWiki Extension Descriptor") I was thinking > >>> about > >>>> naming it XEP (for "XWiki Extension Package"). Any better idea ? > >>>> > >>>> For now my plan is to provide the following: > >>>> * a new Maven handler for <packaging>xep</packaging> > >>>> * a new Maven mojo "xep" in the existing extension Maven plugin > >>>> * start using it with the new platform flavor which is supposed to > >>> replace > >>>> XE so that people can have something to use for offline installs > >>>> > >>>> WDYT ? > >>> > >>> Sounds good. > >>> > >>> Regarding the naming, assuming we need a file extension other than ZIP, > >>> "XWiki Extension Package” seems like a package for a single XWiki > Extension. > >>> > >>> Some ideas. Why not something in the name that suggest it’s a > repository. > >>> > >>> For example: XWiki Extension Repository Archive or XWiki Repository > >>> Archive for short, which, using a 3LA, would translate into XRA. > >>> > >>> XAR = XWiki Archive = a single extension > >>> XRA = XWiki Repository Archive = a repository of extensions = several > >>> extensions > >>> > >>> We could also have XWiki Extension Repository, i.e. “XER”, which would > >>> also be one letter change from XAR: > >>> > >>> XAR = XWiki Archive = a single extension > >>> XER = XWiki Extension Repository = a repository of extensions = several > >>> extensions > >>> > >> > >> I'm fine with XER. > >> > >> > >>> Now since the users will need to unzip this binary and they won’t > import > >>> it (as they do for XAR), it would be better for it to be ZIP as > otherwise > >>> it’ll harder to unzip (no double-clicking on it for ex). > >>> > >> > >> As I said I think we'll have a UI for it at some point. I just don't > think > >> I will have time to work on that in the new platform flavor scope (or > maybe > >> just a quick tool in > >> http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/Extension+Tweak). > > > > I know you said that but IMO the primary usage is for users to unzip > into a given directory and the easiest is to provide a ZIP to them. Even if > we have an import UI, we can still offer the ZIP to that UI… > > > > So at this point, I don’t fully understand why we’d need something other > than zip. > > > > Sounds like we might be overcomplicated things. On the maven side, we > could use the maven assembly plugin to generate the zip. > > > > Am I missing something? > > > > Thanks > > -Vincent > > > >> Thanks > >>> -Vincent > >>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Thomas Mortagne > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Thomas Mortagne > > > > > -- > Sergiu Dumitriu > http://purl.org/net/sergiu > -- Thomas Mortagne
