Same as Thomas too.

Thanks
-Vincent

> On 12 Jan 2018, at 13:50, Eduard Moraru <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi devs,
> 
> These are the current code style rules for committed XML wiki pages:
> http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/XWikiXMLFilesCodeStyle
> 
> = Proposal 1 =
> 
> I was personally not aware we had documented these practices that we had
> been applying since forever. It's good that we have them, but there seems
> to be no mention about committing changes for the "creationDate", "date"
> and "contentUpdateDate" fields.
> 
> Part of the committers (including myself) are applying the old practice of
> omitting changes to the date fields when committing a change to an XML wiki
> page. However, since this practice is not written and agreed upon, its
> usage is not consistent.
> 
> So, the proposal is to include the rule of not committing changes on the
> date fields of XML wiki pages.
> 
> The rationale, AFAIR, includes:
> * After an upgrade, users should not see "ghost" modifications in their
> wiki (e.g. when sorting by date in the Page Index). This affects even more
> manual imports with the "as backup" option enabled.
> * On release, any date changes of a default translation XML page will
> produce N other XML page changes, for each translation of the modified page
> (due to the way l10n exports the translations based on the latest version
> of the default language of that page).
> * others?
> 
> = Proposal 2 =
> 
> Now, building on this, I would like to make a second proposal (which I
> don't believe deserves a separate thread):
> 1) Let's remove all date fields from committed XML wiki pages in our source
> repository
> 2) Let's make sure that the XAR import properly handles empty or missing
> date fields and falls back on the current date
> 3) Let's update the xar:format goal to remove the date fields
> (configurable, since it could they might still be needed by some content
> projects, etc.)
> 4) Let's make the build fail (xar:verify) if the XML wiki pages contain
> date fields (again configurable, as above)
> 
> Note: All the above still depend on the first proposal of not committing
> date changes to XML files (which will be simplified by point 3) above).
> 
> The rationale for this is that we have always wanted to fix our "dates
> problem", since after installation, the wiki is populated with pages
> created in 2009, which is extremely odd to users that have just installed
> XWiki. This second proposal sounds to me like a solution for that.
> 
> WDYT?
> 
> Thanks,
> Eduard

Reply via email to