IRC Archive for channel #xwiki on 30 June 2014

Last modified by Vincent Massol on 2014/06/30 23:36

<lucaa> has quit
01:00 <Inge-_> is now known as <Inge->
02:03 <teekay> has joined #xwiki
04:30 <Denis> has joined #xwiki
05:02 <teekay> has quit
05:25 <Denis1> has joined #xwiki
05:29 <Denis> has quit
06:01 <teekay> has joined #xwiki
06:03 <Denis1> has quit
06:51 <mflorea> has joined #xwiki
08:04 <vmassol> has joined #xwiki
08:33 <tmortagne> has joined #xwiki
08:55 <cjd> has joined #xwiki
09:01 <gdelhumeau> has joined #xwiki
09:07 <mflorea> has quit
09:10 <woshilapin> has joined #xwiki
09:10 <msmeria> has joined #xwiki
09:11 <evalica> has joined #xwiki
09:24 <tmortagne> restarted
09:28 <mflorea> has joined #xwiki
09:28 <Enygma`> has joined #xwiki
09:31 <Enygma`> has quit
09:32 <Enygma`> has joined #xwiki
09:32 <Enygma`> has quit
09:33 <Enygma`> has joined #xwiki
09:46 <lucaa> has joined #xwiki
09:51 <Lyes> has joined #xwiki
10:10 <Denis1> has joined #xwiki
10:47 <vmassol> mflorea: Hi, I need your help on the wysiwyg server module
10:48 <vmassol> I'm trying to fix and the problem I think is just that the SYNTAX metadata is not set in the XDOM block, in OfficeMacroImporter.buildXDOM() (only the BASE is set)
10:49 <vmassol> actually maybe I can just force the syntax to "xhtml/1.0" here since the rendering is done in XHTML I believe
10:49 <vmassol> is that right?
10:51 <mflorea> vmassol: Hi, I would need to check the code, don't know that part by heart :)
10:52 <vmassol> ok, I'm trying it now
11:17 <vmassol> mflorea:  my bad, it should be the syntax of the content generated by the Office Macro actually, checking code
11:18 <vmassol> ok I know what to do
11:55 <vmassol> guys please be careful about what you commit from now on on the 6.1 branch
11:55 <vmassol> we're past the RC and supposed to release the final real soon now
11:55 <vmassol> so no risk please :)
11:55 <vmassol> just blocking bug fixes
11:56 <vmassol> (or not dangerous things related to the flamingo skin which is off by default)
11:56 <vmassol> (and stuff that don't affect the colibri skin nor the rest of the system)
11:59 <tekzilla> has joined #xwiki
12:00 <tekzilla> has quit
12:00 <KermitTheFragger> has joined #xwiki
12:22 <sburjan`> has joined #xwiki
12:25 <sburjan> has quit
12:25 <sburjan`> is now known as <sburjan>
13:43 <vmassol> tmortagne: I'd like to work on this afternoon because Andreea is adding a lot of compatbility information and it's better if it's in the right place
13:43 <vmassol> (this is a a FYI in case you have some additional ideas on this topic)
13:43 <vmassol> evalica: I'm interested in your inputs too :)
13:43 <vmassol> (and anyone else ofc ! :))
13:44 <evalica> k - I'll read it
13:44 <vmassol> the only downside, is that we're starting to need even more a UI for managing versions
13:45 <tmortagne> vmassol: this field does not exist in XWiki Repository, it's a customization
13:45 <evalica> I will never go out of business with this UI field :)
13:45 <tmortagne> so XWIKI-9642 is not really true
13:45 <vmassol> evalica: until we invent direct brain to brain communication ;)
13:46 <vmassol> tmortagne: ok
13:46 <vmassol> thanks
13:46 <vmassol> too bad that this concept of ExtensionVersionClass  doesn't exist in platform
13:46 <vmassol> (platform = XWiki Repository app)
13:47 <vmassol> any reason why?
13:47 <vmassol> tmortagne: hmm are you sure?
13:47 <vmassol> just found ExtensionVersionClass in git
13:47 <vmassol> in platform
13:47 <tmortagne> vmassol: you are mixing stuff
13:48 <tmortagne> i'm talking aout compatibility field
13:48 <tmortagne> this field does not exist
13:48 <vmassol> yes but I don't care about this field
13:48 <vmassol> :)
13:48 <tmortagne> of course there is versions in XWiki Repository
13:48 <tmortagne> that's the first thing you talk about in the issue...
13:48 <vmassol> what I care is adding a new field to ExtensionVersionClass
13:48 <vmassol> (and deprecated the "compatibility" one)
13:48 <vmassol> *depreczate
13:48 <vmassol> *deprecate
13:49 <vmassol> XWIKI-9642 is valid for me
13:49 <vmassol> the issue is about adding a field to ExtensionVersionClass
13:49 <tmortagne> if you change the title sure :)
13:49 <tmortagne> right now it's talking about merging a field that does not exist in the version object
13:50 <evalica> vmassol: one of the idea I have regarding this Compatilibty field is using tags maybe. Instead of the free form, we could have tags like "5.0" , "6.1", etc. this way we could use the TagCloud and filter what applications are tested / working on a specific version.
13:50 <vmassol> title changed
13:50 <tmortagne> would make tag cloud quite a mess IMO
13:51 <vmassol> we have 2 solutions IMO
13:51 <evalica> then we can create a tags funtionality clone just for the compatibility versions
13:51 <vmassol> - a new freeform text for each ExtensionVersionClass
13:51 <vmassol> - a new XClass for holding compat information (more structured)
13:51 <tmortagne> now the issue at XWiki Repository level is that there is no reason XR talk about XE, it does not even know that exist
13:52 <vmassol> yes it should not be related to XE, we can either put "XWiki" or have a field to enter the "product"
13:52 <evalica> I'd like the new XClass with compatibility info, and we can borrow the UI from tags. That's what Jira is also doing… having like tags things.
13:53 <vmassol> new XClass would have fields: extension version, xwiki flavor, works or not (true|false) and notes
13:55 <vmassol> missing xwiki flavor version
13:55 <vmassol> (note: default value for "xwiki flavor" should be XE for now)
13:56 <tmortagne> it should be clear it's about users tests, you should not have the feeling that if you are installing the extension in a different version it's not going to work, the supposedly proper place for that information technically is declared dependencies
13:56 <vmassol> so I also think a new xclass might be better, wdyt tmortagne? However the version values should be left open, so I could write "5.4.5 - 6.1" for the XE version for ex
13:56 <vmassol> tmortagne: yes indeed
13:56 <tmortagne> vmassol: not XE, but a configurable default flavor that would be configured in exo
13:57 <tmortagne> about the version we have a version range syntax
13:57 <vmassol> that's hard
13:57 <vmassol> for a UI
13:57 <vmassol> really really hard
13:57 <vmassol> :)
13:57 <tmortagne> the best is probably to introduce a version range property type and related UI
13:58 <vmassol> now it's starting to become a complex topic
13:58 <vmassol> :)
13:58 <vmassol> I meant to code this in  1-2 hours initially and quickly
13:58 <vmassol> so that Andrea could fill the info
13:59 <tmortagne> if we want to display a related filter it needs to be parseable
13:59 <vmassol> we can start with text
13:59 <vmassol> *could
14:01 <tmortagne> it's not going to be very useful if people put ranges
14:01 <evalica> vmassol: how about allowing thing like 6.x - this way you don't need ranges
14:01 <evalica> since we have a way to write versions more compact
14:01 <tmortagne> since it's about users tests it should probably be single versions only
14:01 <tmortagne> you test on a specific version
14:02 <tmortagne> then the filter is a simple text filter indeed
14:02 <evalica> the ranges could be used just in the display if we have +10 versions
14:02 <evalica> with the ability to expand
14:02 <evalica> and display the exact versions
14:03 <vmassol> yes a single version is simpler for sure
14:03 <vmassol> I wonder if we should replace the "whether it works or not" by a reating
14:03 <vmassol> *rating
14:03 <vmassol> an integer from 1 to 5
14:03 <vmassol> or
14:04 <evalica> ratings are for quality, not for 'workability' :)
14:04 <vmassol> not exactly caty
14:04 <vmassol> for example if some translations are missing
14:04 <vmassol> does it work or not?
14:04 <vmassol> or if some title is badly displayed
14:05 <vmassol> the alternative is to remove the concept of "works or not" and just keep the notes field
14:05 <tmortagne> well it's not that simple, if you have an extension working since a specific version you might end up with a very bad grade because someone put 0 for a previous version
14:06 <tmortagne> it depends what we really want to display here
14:06 <vmassol> for ex on we have a green tick
14:07 <vmassol> to indicate it "works" iwth XE 6.0.1
14:07 <vmassol> but the concept is fuzzy
14:07 <tmortagne> yes but this field is usally here to indicate since when you can use that extension
14:07 <vmassol> I think what we want to show is for a user who wants to install this extensiosn whether he'll have some surprise or not
14:07 <tmortagne> it was not really meant to indicate you if it's good
14:07 <vmassol> what's the point of testing then?
14:08 <vmassol> if you don't say whether it works or not!
14:08 <vmassol> :)
14:08 <vmassol> just saying it's been tested provides no value
14:08 <vmassol> you need to say whether it worked or not
14:08 <vmassol> whatever "worked" means
14:08 <tmortagne> if it does not work in a version you are not supposed to say you tested it, tested here means validated
14:08 <vmassol> i don't agree
14:09 <vmassol> it's very useful
14:09 <evalica> IMO all shouldhave green thicks. If you find a red thick just replace it with green on a previous version. Compatibility means on which versions the app is working.
14:09 <vmassol> to not that it doesn't work in such version
14:09 <tmortagne> that's how the field always been used
14:09 <vmassol> s/not/know
14:09 <vmassol> evalica: no
14:09 <vmassol> because we don't test all versions
14:09 <vmassol> so you don't if it's not htere becasue
14:09 <vmassol> - it hasn't been tested
14:09 <vmassol> - it doesn't work
14:09 <vmassol> evalica: errr?
14:09 <vmassol> so you expect people who want to install an extension
14:10 <vmassol> to go through all the jira issues?
14:10 <vmassol> :)
14:10 <evalica> I mean… all apps should be working, if they are not working than is something temporary
14:10 <vmassol> errr
14:10 <evalica> :)
14:10 <vmassol> then why test anything?
14:10 <vmassol> if all is working
14:10 <tmortagne> vmassol: if you want to add grades just do that but don't try to implement it as a replacement, we can always see later
14:10 <evalica> to tell the people on what versions to install
14:10 <vmassol> and why report it?
14:10 <evalica> all the versions not mentioned.. they should not used them there
14:11 <tmortagne> we do want grades at some point anyway so OK lets add grade, we don't really need to debate if it's a replacement of this field just now
14:11 <tmortagne> the only reason there is no grades is that we did not had time to do it yet
14:12 <D-Spair> has quit
14:13 <tmortagne> but I don't feel grades indicates that an extension is just doing what's is supposed to do
14:13 <vmassol> it's more generic but it doesn't include that too
14:14 <tmortagne> it's a value you put on an extension even if it has no bug
14:14 <vmassol> I doubt that a non working version of an extension would get a good grade
14:14 <vmassol> *doesn't/does
14:14 <tmortagne> sure but you can get 5/5 for a crappy extension that does not have bugs with that logic
14:15 <vmassol> no
14:15 <vmassol> you'd put 5/5 if you're very satifised with the extension
14:15 <vmassol> ie it works + it's useful
14:15 <tmortagne> so how much point does "it works" gives you ?
14:15 <vmassol> a non useful extension but working wouldn't get a good grade IMO
14:16 <vmassol> grading is subjective, it's up to the person who grades to decide that
14:16 <vmassol> again if I install an extension and it doesn't work, and I want to grade it,
14:16 <vmassol> if the extensions is very nice
14:16 <tmortagne> it depends what you are doing, Andreea is not jugging whether an extension is good or not
14:16 <vmassol> I'd give like 3/5 and in a comment, say: "nice extension but doesn't work"
14:17 <vmassol> yes sure
14:17 <vmassol> I was not even suggesting that she grades them
14:17 <msmeria1> has joined #xwiki
14:17 <tmortagne> you talked about covering Andreea use case with grades...
14:17 <vmassol> although she probably should since she's testing them
14:17 <vmassol> :)
14:17 <vmassol> what I'd like her to fill absolutely
14:18 <vmassol> is when it doesn't work, to fill the Notes part about what doesn't work, (a jira link would be best)
14:18 <tmortagne> can be in the extension description
14:19 <vmassol> I have suggetsed a notes field above
14:19 <vmassol> it's related to the combination of XWki flavor/version and extension version
14:20 <tmortagne> if the point is only jugging if an extension is just working then it's not grades
14:20 <msmeria> has quit
14:20 <vmassol> wdym by "just working"?
14:20 <vmassol> if you mean "has no bugs" then this doesn't exist ;)
14:22 <vmassol> so
14:22 <vmassol> to summarize
14:23 <vmassol> - don't define a field to say whether it works or not
14:23 <vmassol> - only use these fields:
14:23 <vmassol> - introduce a grade property later on (in ExtensionVersionClass probably)
14:23 <tmortagne> so no grades for now
14:23 <vmassol> no grdes but a notes field to mention issues
14:25 <vmassol> maybe the "xwiki flavor version" field should be a list separated by a separator
14:25 <vmassol> (pipe for ex)
14:26 <vmassol> to not duplicate too many information
14:26 <vmassol> 5.4.5|6.0.1
14:26 <tmortagne> a real list property, not a custom string
14:28 <vmassol> yes
14:28 <vmassol> (same as for Authors)
14:36 <vmassol> thanks for the brainstorming evalica and tmortagne! :-
14:36 <vmassol> :)
14:53 <lucaa> has quit
14:57 <lucaa> has joined #xwiki
15:43 <polx> has joined #xwiki
15:47 <polx> has quit
16:27 <vmassol> ok I've done a quick POC
16:27 <vmassol> I've used it here:
16:31 <tmortagne> vmassol: so it's only about successful tests ?
16:31 <vmassol> my idea now is:
16:32 <tmortagne> or you need to make sure it's not written "Does ot work at all" in the Notes ?
16:32 <vmassol> - add support for specifying the issue tracker in some properties
16:32 <vmassol> (issue tracker type, url, project id)
16:32 <vmassol> - display the list of known issues automatically in the sheet
16:33 <vmassol> (query all open issues for affects >= the latest published version)
16:33 <vmassol> - in the release notes section, generate automaitcally the list of issues fixed for the release
16:33 <vmassol> Now
16:34 <vmassol> if there are some problems with a version you can add an xobject but put your remarks in the notes
16:34 <tmortagne> "has been validated" sounds a bit misleading but maybe it's just me
16:34 <vmassol> I wondered
16:34 <tmortagne> maybe "has been tested"
16:34 <vmassol> yes I had "has been tested" initialy
16:34 <vmassol> I could put that back
16:35 <tmortagne> (but it's not like I was an English expert)
16:35 <vmassol> putting back
16:37 <vmassol> tmortagne: where is the sheet displaying the compatibility property?
16:38 <vmassol> found it
16:38 <vmassol> it was in another space
16:38 <vmassol>
16:39 <tmortagne> all EXO customization should be in EXOExtensionCode space
16:40 <tmortagne> actually I put the types in ExtensionCode, I should probably move them
16:51 <tmortagne> has quit
17:17 <tmortagne> has joined #xwiki
17:18 <Denis1> has quit
17:35 <xwikibot> has joined #xwiki
17:40 <evalica> has quit
17:45 <msmeria1> has quit
17:47 <Enygma`> has quit
17:48 <gdelhumeau> has quit
18:16 <tmortagne> has quit
18:45 <KermitTheFragger> has quit
18:57 <mflorea> has quit
19:34 <Lyes1> has joined #xwiki
19:36 <Lyes> has quit
20:02 <lucaa1> has joined #xwiki
20:04 <Lyes1> has quit
20:05 <lucaa> has quit
20:08 <lucaa1> has quit
20:11 <cjd> has quit
20:24 <nickless> has joined #xwiki
20:59 <vmassol> has quit
21:13 <vmassol> has joined #xwiki
21:17 <vmassol> has quit
22:11 <xwikiorg_guest_4> has joined #xwiki
22:11 <xwikiorg_guest_4> has left #xwiki
22:26 <OSIMasson> has joined #xwiki
23:29 <Emenems_> has joined #xwiki
23:29 <Denis> has joined #xwiki
23:32 <joel2> has joined #xwiki
23:34 <Emenems> has quit
23:36 <xwikinewb> has quit

Get Connected