urosm
/
ikiwiki
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

update for rename of peteg.mdwn to users/peteg.mdwn

master
http://smcv.pseudorandom.co.uk/ 2011-11-04 11:11:14 -04:00 committed by admin
parent b37ae9d604
commit 06f5382faa
1 changed files with 6 additions and 6 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

12
doc/todo/web_reversion.mdwn
View File

@ -24,16 +24,16 @@ Implementation plan:
and refresh site.
Peter Gammie has done an initial implementation of the above.
[[!template id=gitbranch branch=peteg/revert author="[[peteg]]"]]
[[!template id=gitbranch branch=peteg/revert author="[[users/peteg]]"]]
>> It is on a separate branch now. --[[peteg]]
>> It is on a separate branch now. --[[users/peteg]]
> Review: --[[Joey]]
>
> The revert commit will not currently say what web user did the revert.
> This could be fixed by doing a --no-commit revert first and then using
> rcs_commit_staged.
>> Fixed, I think. --[[peteg]]
>> Fixed, I think. --[[users/peteg]]
>
> So I see one thing I completly forgot about is `check_canedit`. Avoiding users
> using reverting to make changes they would normally not be allowed to do is
@ -45,12 +45,12 @@ Peter Gammie has done an initial implementation of the above.
> structure that `rcs_recieve` does. This could be done by using `git revert
> --no-commit`, and then examining the changes, and then `git reset` to drop
> them.
>> We can use the existing `git_commit_info` with the patch ID - no need to touch the working directory. -- [[peteg]]
>> We can use the existing `git_commit_info` with the patch ID - no need to touch the working directory. -- [[users/peteg]]
>
> Then the code that is currently in IkiWiki/Receive.pm, that calls
> `check_canedit` and `check_canremove` to test the change, can be
> straightforwardly refactored out, and used for checking reverts too.
>> Wow, that was easy. :-) -- [[peteg]]
>> Wow, that was easy. :-) -- [[users/peteg]]
>
> (The data from `rcs_preprevert` could also be used for a confirmation
> prompt -- it doesn't currently include enough info for diffs, but at
@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ Peter Gammie has done an initial implementation of the above.
>>> I agree, but have not figured out a way to make a hook work yet.
>>> --[[Joey]]
>>
>> Please look it over and tell me what else needs fixing... -- [[peteg]]
>> Please look it over and tell me what else needs fixing... -- [[users/peteg]]
>>> I have made my own revert branch and put a few^Wseveral fixes in there.
>>> All merged to master now! --[[Joey]]