> On 22 May 2017, at 16:46, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.morta...@xwiki.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 22 May 2017, at 16:39, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.morta...@xwiki.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 22 May 2017, at 16:27, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.morta...@xwiki.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 22 May 2017, at 15:34, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.morta...@xwiki.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would be more in favor of moving them to some extension than can be
>>>>>>> easily installed if really needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The downside with this approach compared to the legacy approach are:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * The user will gets broken before they can understand the problem and
>>>>>> fix it so bad from a usability POV. They’ll also need to understand
>>>>>> where to get the extension and install it
>>>>>> * We break a contract if we consider that default pages are a contract
>>>>>> (we need to decide about that but I think it would be fair to say the
>>>>>> pages are a contract)
>>>>>
>>>>> Well by that definition we "broke" quite a lot of XE pages over the
>>>>> years by moving them to not bundled contrib extensions or simply by
>>>>> modifying some page that never been supposed to be API. Saying any
>>>>> page is an API is really not a good idea in the current state. We
>>>>> could discuss an explicit way to indicate what is an API and what is
>>>>> internal for future pages if you want but right now It should be a
>>>>> case by case I think.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you absolutely want to keep them, keep them. I'm just saying that I
>>>>> would be OK to move them away (provided that they are easy to install
>>>>> if really needed) since they display stuff that many recent users
>>>>> won't understand ("space" ?) and I don't think they are used that much
>>>>> in extensions.
>>>>
>>>> Yes but that’s not the main point. The main point is breaking the XWiki UI
>>>> of the user who upgrades (and thus introducing a WTF effect - what I
>>>> called a usability issue). So what you’re saying in essence, is that it’s
>>>> ok to do so from your POV.
>>>
>>> I don't understand. Standard XE UI does not use those pages anywhere
>>> anymore so what is going to be broken exactly when you upgrade ?
>>> My
>>> point is that it's only supposed to break extensions that would use
>>> those pages or if the user have customization that rely on those pages
>>> but that's true for any change in any page most of which never been
>>> designed as APIs (so a lot less carefully than is required for an
>>> API).
>>
>> Take for example the home page which was using Main.Spaces AFAIR. Imagine
>> I’m on XWiki 7.x and I’ve customized the home page. When I upgrade to 9.x
>> I’ll keep the home page that I’ve customized. So the home page will not get
>> displayed correctly anymore (if it’s using an include, it’ll be missing
>> content).
>>
>> I’d venture that 99% of wikis used for real have their home page customized
>> and thus this should affect a lot of users.
>
> I agree with the 99% but not so much with the fact that they keep the
> spaces widget :)
Indeed :)
There’s another use case in addition to the 2 you mentioned above: if the user
has created pages or panels using those pages (for example space dashboards).
Thanks
-Vincent
>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any other opinion on this (I’d like more before deciding on something)?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Vincent
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> -Vincent
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, May 22, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi devs,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We have this jira issue I created a while ago and I’d like to move
>>>>>>>> forward:
>>>>>>>> https://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-13101
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have one question:
>>>>>>>> Should we move the 4 pages into a legacy module in platform and bundle
>>>>>>>> it in XE or just remove them?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My POV:
>>>>>>>> We could consider the pages as APIs I guess and use the API strategy
>>>>>>>> of moving deprecated APIs to legacy.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> -Vincent
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Thomas Mortagne
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thomas Mortagne
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thomas Mortagne
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thomas Mortagne
