Also note that this was introdued mostly for the Manual QA team since they were testing a lot extensions and that was a way to make public the versions of the extensions they were testing.
Discussion
So we need to decide if we still want that feature.
2 options:
We still want it. Then we should put back the code through some new standard extension point, so that it doesn’t get overwritten by the RepositoryApplication upgrades. And also document it in the Manual Testing guide.
We don’t think it’s that useful. Then we should remove the ExtensionCode.ExtensionCompatibilityClass class and remove the doc from contrib.xwiki.org
Any preference?
On my side, I’m tempted by 1) because it’s not so much work and it could still be interesting information.
I’m fine with both, with a slight preference for 1. since there is still manual validation of various extensions, and we could as well put the result in there.
We discussed with @atarata and the situation is a little bit different now than it was in the past regarding extensions on extensions.xwiki.org. We mainly used to use the info from “Tested On” section to keep some track on the versions of the apps tested and the XWiki version that were tested on.
Recently, the Test Reporting Application implemented the Name and Version of the tested apps and since then it seems easier to obtain this info from test.xwiki.org when needed.
We are testing mainly the Supported Extensions from extensions.xwiki.org and roughly once per year, since the time is limited and there are many extensions to be tested.
The main reason for keeping the “Tested On” section at this point would be to have the info on extension’s page about the versions tested in combination to a particular XWiki version for the public.
Also, in the past we were facing some issues when editing the “Tested On” section, issues related mainly to stability of xwiki.org (loading pages in Objects mode was quite slow) and also there were some pages that froze when opened in Objects mode.
If this improved and updating the “Tested On” values would be faster, then we are ok for keeping it.
The XWiki versions on which an application was tested can currently be seen at a glance on the main test page for every application, corresponding to every test performed, under “Latest version tested” column (e.g. for Blog: Blog Tests).
More details, like the version of the app tested in combination to a respective XWiki version is displayed on every test page, under the “App” column, e.g.: for Blog Installation test. This modular view offers info on what combination (app version + XWiki version) was that respective feature tested.
However, I agree that this information is not easily available to the public as it is. This is why I’m +1 for keeping the “Tested On” section on the documentation page of the app at the moment.
On one hand, I like the idea of linking from the exo page to test.xwiki.org where readers could see all the tested versions.
OTOH, test.xwiki.org is mostly used by the Manual QA team of xwiki.org and simple users of XWiki wouldn’t report tests there if they happen to test a combination of Extension version/XWiki version.
Now, the past suggests that very few (if any) users will help in filling the “Tested On” section, so I’m not sure if we shouldn’t content ourselves with test.xwiki.org and just improve it if need be, to make the information easier to find.
For example, right now, I don’t see how you link an extension to a set of tests. It seems to be by name which isn’t precise. A link by extension id would be much better (as we do in the docapp extension).
I feel that ideally https://test.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/ should have a column for the extension id (since everything in XWiki is an extension). It would be much easier to list all tests related to an extension in this manner. Maybe an issue is that we have tests that span several extensions, so we could have a list of extensions concerned instead of a single one.
I have the feeling we might need/want some dev from the core dev team to review that test app at some point and refactor it a bit.
So in conclusion, right now I’m a bit more in favor of linking to test.xwiki.org (if that’s doable ofc, it seems ok for the blog app, but what about other extensions).