January 2014 - xwiki-devs@xwiki.org

[xwiki-devs] Questions about fixing getRenderedContent() bug
by Vincent Massol 18 Feb '15

18 Feb '15

Hi, Im trying to fix http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/browse/XWIKI-4274 Basically if you do $xwiki.getDocument("someDoc").getRenderedContent() it'll get executed in the context of the current doc which I believe is wrong especially since other signatures of getRenderedContent() execute in the target document's context. I have fixed this locally but found that admin.vm for example is assuming that getRenderedContent() will get executed in the context of the calling doc (i.e. XWiki.Import when doing an import for example). FYI the chain flow is admin.vm -- getRenderedContent() --> XWiki.AdminSheet --> XWiki.AdminImportSheet --> importinline.vm, which requires the current doc to be XWiki.Import (to get/put attachments from/to it). I can fix this easily using a new getRenderedContent signature I've introduced. However I'm wondering if we have other places that incorrectly use getRenderedContent() and assume it won't be rendered in the context of the target document. Is this change too dangerous to make? If not know, we'll need to it quickly (2.1M1?) since it's an important bug IMO. WDYT? Thanks -Vincent

4 7

[xwiki-devs] [Contrib] Request repository for Recruitment Application
by Alexandru Chelariu 08 Oct '14

08 Oct '14

Hello, I would like to request a repository on xwiki-contrib for the Recruitment Application i am working on. I'd like the repo to be named application-recruitment and also jira component. My github username is chalx. Thank you, Alexandru Chelariu

4 3

[xwiki-devs] [ANN] 10 years of the XWiki open source project!
by Vincent Massol 13 Jun '14

13 Jun '14

Hi everyone, On the 15th of December (i.e. in a month's time), it will be **10 years** since the first commit on the XWiki open source project. Ludovic did the first commit in CVS on Sourceforge: " 15.12.2003 10:13:33, by ludovic Initial revision " (Can be seen at http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/XWIKI/search?from=20030101&to=20040101 ) 10 years is starting to be some respectable milestone! I invite everyone to join us in celebrating by adding your own story about your interaction with the XWiki community or the XWiki software at http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Drafts/TenYearsOfXWiki <XWiki SAS hat> Since I'm also the CTO of the XWiki SAS company, I'd like to officially invite all the members of this great community to join us in celebrating the 10 days of the XWiki project at the XWiki SAS office in Paris, France on the 12th of December 2013. Here's the invitation: http://www.xwiki.com/lang/en/News/XWiki+10th+Anniversary See you there! </XWiki SAS hat> Well done everyone! -Vincent Massol

2 2

[xwiki-devs] [Proposal] Cleaning our POM deps by explicitly listing used dependencies?
by Vincent Massol 06 Jun '14

06 Jun '14

Hi devs, Running mvn dependency:dependency-analyze produces interesting results. For example: [INFO] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [INFO] Building XWiki Commons - Properties 3.2-SNAPSHOT [INFO] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- … [INFO] --- maven-dependency-plugin:2.3:analyze (default-cli) @ xwiki-commons-properties --- [WARNING] Used undeclared dependencies found: [WARNING] org.slf4j:slf4j-api:jar:1.6.1:compile [WARNING] javax.inject:javax.inject:jar:1:compile [WARNING] Unused declared dependencies found: [WARNING] org.xwiki.commons:xwiki-commons-component-api:jar:3.2-SNAPSHOT:compile [WARNING] org.xwiki.commons:xwiki-commons-test:jar:3.2-SNAPSHOT:test [WARNING] org.hibernate:hibernate-validator:jar:4.2.0.Final:test [WARNING] org.hamcrest:hamcrest-core:jar:1.1:test [WARNING] org.jmock:jmock:jar:2.5.1:test The question is (for this module but more generally for all others): * Should we add slf4j and javax.inject reps in the pom.xml for this module? (for ex today slf4j and javax.inject are found in the component-api dep) I think we should, wdyt? Note that the "Unused declared dependencies found:" doesn't always generate correct results as is the case here. This is mostly because it's a static byte code check so any dep used at runtime will be considered unused. See http://www.sonatype.com/books/mvnex-book/reference/optimizing-sect-dependen… Thanks -Vincent

6 16

[xwiki-devs] [Proposal] Hidden wikis & template wikis
by Guillaume "Louis-Marie" Delhumeau 15 Apr '14

15 Apr '14

Hi devs. In the coming 5.3 milestone 2, all wikis are displayed in the Wiki Index, including the templates, which was not the case before. >From the user point of view, maybe these templates should not be listed in the Wiki Index. But on the other hand, if you want to see a template, you will not be able to access through the wiki index. We also have introduced the "hidden" flag for wikis (in the WikiDescriptor, not in the UI yet). If we consider template wikis are "technical" wikis, we may use this flag to hide them. Then, in the Wiki Index, we don't care if a wiki is a template or not, we only care about the "hidden" flag. If the user does not want to see the templates in the list, she can mark them as hidden, exactly as we do for documents. But what about the template list in the wiki creation wizard? Should we list all templates, or only the visible ones? My proposition: - all wikis are visible though the wiki index (template or not). - if we want to hide templates to the users, we use the hidden flag in the wiki descriptor. - in the wiki creation wizard, we display all the templates, even these which are tagged as hidden. WDYT? Thanks, Louis-Marie

5 6

[xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Remove all duplicated information from folders names on git repositories
by Thomas Mortagne 20 Mar '14

20 Mar '14

Reviving http://markmail.org/message/hlnqke3igkbec332 for as an official vote. We have waited way too long and I think we really need to find a solution even if none of the committers use Windows since a long time. Every time a Windows dev even think of contributing he is very quickly discouraged... As a reminder the issue is that working on XWiki source code is a pain for MS Windows developers because of the (impossible to understand I agree) limitation on path size. So the idea is to find a new logical rule to drastically shorten our paths and Sergiu proposed the following: remove duplicated information from our paths to maven modules. Here is an example: xwiki-platform-core/xwiki-platform-rendering/xwiki-platform-rendering-transformations/xwiki-platform-rendering-transformation-macro (131 chars) would become core/rendering/transformations/macro (36 chars) So WDYT ? Here is my +1 I also find it nicer when navigating using cd and tab in a unix shell anyway. Planning to do it in 5.1 if everyone agree. -- Thomas Mortagne

9 34

[xwiki-devs] [Discussion][Skin] Bootstrap integration inside platform
by Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 18 Mar '14

18 Mar '14

Hi, As part of the 6.0 Roadmap we have as entry the creation/integration of a new Skin inside XWiki. Currently there are 2 proposals for the new skin: Flamingo http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Skin4x Junco http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/JuncoSkin Both proposals are done using Twitter's Bootstrap framework ( http://getbootstrap.com) This thread's purpose is to discuss possible problems we might face by integrating Bootstrap inside platform. You can find the investigation page at http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/BootstrapIntegration Besides the already mentioned problems I would want to know the community's opinion about this framework. Have you worked with it? Do you think we should consider some alternatives? See some other frameworks at http://usablica.github.io/front-end-frameworks/compare.html Thanks, Caty

7 9

[xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Create reference to macros
by Denis Gervalle 14 Mar '14

14 Mar '14

Hi devs, While building the new signed script solution with Thomas, we have the need to create a new kind of entity references for macros. This will allow us to keep reference to signed macros. Those references will have entityReference as parent, since macros may be contained in document, but also in object properties. Currently we do not need a syntax for those references, since these will only exists as objects. So, no string serializer is planned. So, we need to agree on creating macroReference that will have at this point a unique identifier (to be discussed later) and a parent that could be either a documentReference or an objectPropertyReference. Here is my +1, -- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO

4 8

[xwiki-devs] [Contrib] Request repository for integration between XWiki and Activiti
by Sorin Burjan 06 Mar '14

06 Mar '14

Hello, Last year I worked for my master thesis on a integration between XWiki and Activiti. Activiti is a popular open-source workflow execution engine. ( http://activiti.org/) I'd like to commit my work so others can use and improve it. For this, I'd like a repository called application-activiti for the source code, and also a JIRA project called Activiti Application with the key ACTIVITI. Thanks in advance, Sorin B.

6 11

[xwiki-devs] [Vote][Skin] Keep Colibri look or have another look for 6.x
by Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) 26 Feb '14

26 Feb '14

Hi, As part of the 6.0 Roadmap we have as entry the creation/integration of a new Skin inside XWiki. Currently there are 2 proposals for the new skin: Flamingo http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Improvements/Skin4x Junco http://design.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Proposal/JuncoSkin = Similarities = * Both skins have been done using the Twitter's Bootstrap framework ( http://getbootstrap.com) * Both skin are thus responsive = Differences = * Flamingo is just a proposal, while Junco is an extension. The difference is that while for Flamingo I have just a prototype, Junco is functional and installable (with some integration problems/dependencies discussed in another thread). The difference matter just from a development time perspective (if we choose Flamingo it will take longer to implement). * Flamingo provides a new look while Junco offers 'Themes', one of themes being very similar to Colibri, see http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/Junco+Skin#HTheme:Coli… This vote mail is about this difference. What to consider: A. Freshness Advantages of Flamingo is that its interface is centered around Applications (it has a new left panel used for navigation). It will provide a visual difference from Colibri and looks more similar to current applications found in the wild. Advantages of Junco is that it provides Themes. Junco's Themes are very similar to our current ColorThemes, the difference is that they can change also the font used, the colors and can also add some esthetic effects (gradients, borders, shadows, etc. - CSS effects) to Bootstrap's components (buttons, navbars, alerts, tables, etc.). But except minor changes, the layout is similar to Colibri. Improvement consist in using refreshed style for font, forms, buttons, messages, etc. B. Extensions Integration One of the reasons I choose to make Junco similar to Colibri was extensions integration. The advantage of XWiki is that you can extend it how you like. The problem is that because the extensions are developed by our community (and not by a single entity) each application is providing it's own style. On extensions.xwiki.org we have applications that provide an unique style, while others are build around and for Colibri. Adding a new skin with a different style (like Flamingo) will make current extensions not look unitary. This problem is more general than just this Colibri/Junco/Flamingo discussion and it the problem of having extensions that adapt to the skin used (without creating special versions for each skin). Junco was created to look similar to Colibri (preserving layout, style, colors) while updating the 'back-end' (created on Bootstrap, it will put at developer's disposal the Bootstrap's guide style and components). One of the reasons we are having this extensions 'incompatibility' is because we are lacking visual standards and guides (maybe using the ones provided by Bootstrap can improve this area - I will send a separate mail about the CSS Framework selection). So from the style standards perspective having Junco integrated first could represent a transition step between our current Colibri and a new skin with a different look, because the developers might use Bootstrap style/structure guides in their extension development (not guaranteed). C. Parallel skin support Another advantage of Junco is that (by having the same layout) is using the same templates as Colibri. Having just a set of templates to maintain is very important from a development perspective especially if your development resources are limited. This is one of the reasons XWiki is not supporting multiple default skins. Flamingo will need some templates changed, so important from a development time and maintenance perspective. So this vote is about: 1. Keep Colibri's current look which is supported by the Junco skin, or 2. Have another look for 6.x which is proposed in the Flamingo skin Thanks, Caty

4 8