[Proposal] [CodeStyle] Committing XML wiki page date changes

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Proposal] [CodeStyle] Committing XML wiki page date changes

Eduard Moraru
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 | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Proposal] [CodeStyle] Committing XML wiki page date changes

Marius Dumitru Florea
+1 to both proposals.

Thanks,
Marius

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:50 PM, Eduard Moraru <[hidden email]> 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 | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Proposal] [CodeStyle] Committing XML wiki page date changes

Alex Cotiugă
I also agree with your proposals, it's better to have some tools to handle
date changes
instead of asking any contributor to exclude them from commits.

Thanks,
Alex

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Marius Dumitru Florea <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1 to both proposals.
>
> Thanks,
> Marius
>
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 2:50 PM, Eduard Moraru <[hidden email]>
> 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 | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Proposal] [CodeStyle] Committing XML wiki page date changes

Thomas Mortagne
Administrator
In reply to this post by Eduard Moraru
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Eduard Moraru <[hidden email]> 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

XAR input filter supports both but I don't see the point in having an
empty date, better remove it.

> 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

- 1 for proposal 1 alone
+1 with proposal 2

I don't care too much about update date vs not update date but we
should not have to do any manual cleaning when exporting a page. So in
short I'm against anything not handled by xar:format.

(by the way http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/XWikiXMLFilesCodeStyle
is not fully up to date since what is indicated for defaultLanguage is
not true in case of translations)

--
Thomas Mortagne
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Proposal] [CodeStyle] Committing XML wiki page date changes

Denis Gervalle-2
Same as Thomas.

--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO

Le 12 janv. 2018 à 16:04 +0100, Thomas Mortagne <[hidden email]>, a écrit :

> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Eduard Moraru <[hidden email]> 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
>
> XAR input filter supports both but I don't see the point in having an
> empty date, better remove it.
>
> > 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
>
> - 1 for proposal 1 alone
> +1 with proposal 2
>
> I don't care too much about update date vs not update date but we
> should not have to do any manual cleaning when exporting a page. So in
> short I'm against anything not handled by xar:format.
>
> (by the way http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/XWikiXMLFilesCodeStyle
> is not fully up to date since what is indicated for defaultLanguage is
> not true in case of translations)
>
> --
> Thomas Mortagne
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Proposal] [CodeStyle] Committing XML wiki page date changes

Ecaterina Moraru (Valica)
+1 P2

Thanks,
Caty

On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 4:16 PM, Denis Gervalle <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Same as Thomas.
>
> --
> Denis Gervalle
> SOFTEC sa - CEO
>
> Le 12 janv. 2018 à 16:04 +0100, Thomas Mortagne <[hidden email]>,
> a écrit :
> > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 1:50 PM, Eduard Moraru <[hidden email]>
> 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
> >
> > XAR input filter supports both but I don't see the point in having an
> > empty date, better remove it.
> >
> > > 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
> >
> > - 1 for proposal 1 alone
> > +1 with proposal 2
> >
> > I don't care too much about update date vs not update date but we
> > should not have to do any manual cleaning when exporting a page. So in
> > short I'm against anything not handled by xar:format.
> >
> > (by the way http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/
> XWikiXMLFilesCodeStyle
> > is not fully up to date since what is indicated for defaultLanguage is
> > not true in case of translations)
> >
> > --
> > Thomas Mortagne
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Proposal] [CodeStyle] Committing XML wiki page date changes

vmassol
Administrator
In reply to this post by Eduard Moraru
Same as Thomas too.

Thanks
-Vincent

> On 12 Jan 2018, at 13:50, Eduard Moraru <[hidden email]> 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 | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Proposal] [CodeStyle] Committing XML wiki page date changes

Guillaume Delhumeau
+1 for both

2018-01-15 10:47 GMT+01:00 Vincent Massol <[hidden email]>:

> Same as Thomas too.
>
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> > On 12 Jan 2018, at 13:50, Eduard Moraru <[hidden email]> 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
>
>


--
Guillaume Delhumeau ([hidden email])
Research & Development Engineer at XWiki SAS
Committer on the XWiki.org project