[Typo3-dev] Hey system extensions! Come back to the extension repository!! was: Re: indexed_search / EXT Rep?

[Michael Scharkow]

Hi Robert (and sorry everyone for OT)

Robert Lemke wrote:

> Technically the MTB etc. are extensions as well. So following your
> suggestion a possible solution would be to have an extension
> "doc_indexed_search" containing the documentation for indexed_search.
> What we can't do (and we actually decided against it in discussions with the
> docteam at the last snowboard tour) is decoupling documentation from
> extensions technically. We still need the container for distributing and
> managing documentation.

Okay, maybe this deserves to be more precise: I agree that it's useful 
to package docs like extensions, let's say in an "container object" that 
has some access methods and some attributes, like files, versions, meta 
infos. (Actually, it might be useful to make adoc container a subclass 
of a generic (extension) container because we need file conversions, and 
maybe different access methods than upload (like wiki edit).)

Let's also say we have a repository object (currently TER) that has and 
manages container objects (extensions). While technically, tt_news and 
MTB are extensions, they should ideally be managed by two different 
repository instances (a TER instance and a TDR instance) of the 
repository class.

This means: When extension authors upload, the code is uploaded to TER 
and then processed, the doc is uploaded to TDR and then processed. Both 
with the same SOAP upload method since both are repository objects. This 
can be done client-side (in EM), or server side (repository A 
dispatching to B, or with a dispatcher frontend).

> Currently the advantage of coupling documentation with extensions is that
> you can alwasy read the documentation for each version, there's a direct
> connection between them. 

This can still be maintained with two different repositories, if the 
dispatcher manages version numbers. But be aware that it should be 
possible to update docs without creating a new extension version, and 
vice versa. This means decoupling to me.

> We only have few documents which are not directly
> related to a specific extension version.

That's because the doc structure was until now much depending on 
extensions (i.e. I had to make an empty extension with a manual.sxw to 
get listed there). But we should have documentation in TDR that does not 
have code (a regular extension) associated with it.

For this problem, that would mean Kasper (or the indexed_search) 
maintainer would need to manage docs in TDR only, and he doesn't use EM 
to upload stuff.

Greetings,
Michael