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

Merge branch 'master' of ssh://git.ikiwiki.info/srv/git/ikiwiki.info

master
Joey Hess 2009-10-17 20:53:57 -04:00
parent 1d094d82a3 1859ccf8ac
commit a43194c57b
4 changed files with 41 additions and 12 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
doc/bugs/broken_parentlinks.mdwn
View File

@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ a dead link for every subpage.
This is a bug, but fixing it is very tricky. Consider what would happen if
example.mdwn were created: example/page.html and the rest of example/*
would need to be updated to change the parentlink from a bare work to a
would need to be updated to change the parentlink from a bare word to a
link to the new page. Now if example.mdwn were removed again, they'd need
to be updated again. So example/* depends on example. But it's even more
tricky, because if example.mdwn is modified, we _don't_ want to rebuild

11
doc/forum/cleaning_up_discussion_pages_and_the_like.mdwn 100644
View File

@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
For example in [[forum/ikiwiki__39__s_notion_of_time]], should one remove the
text about the implementation bug that has been fixed, or should it stay there,
for reference? --[[tschwinge]]
> I have no problem with cleaning up obsolete stuff in the forum, tips, etc.
> --[[Joey]]
That's also what I think: such discussions or comments on [[forum]] discussion
pages, or generally on all pages' [[Discussion]] subpages, can be removed if
either they're simply not valid / interesting / ... anymore, or if they've been
used to improve the *real* documentation. --[[tschwinge]]

19
doc/forum/ever-growing_list_of_pages.mdwn
View File

@ -5,10 +5,6 @@ they're still present in the repository.
Shouldn't there be some clean-up at some point for those that have been
resolved? Or should all of them be kept online forever?
Likewise, for example in [[forum/ikiwiki__39__s_notion_of_time]], should one
remove the text about the implementation bug that has been fixed, or should it
stay there, for reference?
--[[tschwinge]]
> To answer a question with a question, what harm does having the done bugs
@ -18,5 +14,16 @@ stay there, for reference?
> running older versions of the Ikiwiki software may find the page explaining
> that the bug is fixed if they perform a search. -- [[Jon]]
> I like to keep old bugs around. OTOH, I have no problem with cleaning up
> obsolete stuff in the forum, tips, etc. --[[Joey]]
> I like to keep old bugs around. --[[Joey]]
So, I guess it depends on whether you want to represent the development of the
software (meaning: which bugs are open, which are fixed) *(a)* in a snapshot of
the repository (a checkout; that is, what you see rendered on
<http://ikiwiki.info/>), or *(b)* if that information is to be contained in the
backing repository's revision history only. Both approaches are valid. For
people used to using Git for accessing a project's history, *(b)* is what
they're used to, but for those poor souls ;-) that only use a web browser to
access this database, *(a)* is the more useful approach indeed. For me, using
Git, it is a bit of a hindrance, as, when doing a full-text search for a
keyword on a checkout, I'd frequently hit pages that reported a bug, but are
tagged `done` by now. --[[tschwinge]]

21
doc/users/tschwinge.mdwn
View File

@ -48,6 +48,20 @@ contain the \[[!tag open_issue_hurd]].
> `tagged(open_issue_hurd)` in its pagespec should do that. --[[Joey]]
>> Well, that's exactly what this page contains: \[[!map
>> pages="tagged(open_issue_hurd) and !open_issues and !*/discussion"
>> show=title]]
>>
>> This is currently rendered as can be seen on
>> <http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/tag/open_issue_hurd.html>, but I'd imagine
>> it to be rendered by **only** linking to the pages that actually do contain
>> the tag, (**only** the outer leaf ones, which are *capturing stdout and
>> stderr*, *ramdisk*, *syncfs*, ...; but **not** to *hurd*, *debugging*,
>> *translator*, *libstore*, *examples*, ...). Otherwise, the way it's being
>> rendered at the moment, it appears to the reader that *hurd*, *debugging*,
>> *translator*, *libstore*, *examples*, ... were all tagged, too, and not only
>> the outer ones.
## Anchors -- [[ikiwiki/wikilink/discussion]]
## Default Content for Meta Values -- [[plugins/contrib/default_content_for___42__copyright__42___and___42__license__42__]]
@ -75,7 +89,7 @@ pages could perhaps be passed on to the referred-to page?
## Sendmail -- [[todo/passwordauth:_sendmail_interface]]
## Parentlinks -- [[bugs/non-existing_pages_in_parentlinks]]
## [[bugs/Broken Parentlinks]]
## Discussion Pages of Discussion Pages of...
@ -105,13 +119,10 @@ create a way to modify the `TITLE` template variable suitably.
## [[plugins/inline]] feedfile option
Not that important. Git commit b67632cdcdd333cf0a88d03c0f7e6e62921f32c3. This
would be nice to have even when using *usedirs*. Might involve issues as
would be nice to have even when *not* using *usedirs*. Might involve issues as
discussed in *N-to-M Mapping of Input and Output Files* on
[[plugins/contrib/texinfo]].
> Do you mean when *not* using usedirs? It is currently supported for usedirs,
> only. --[[Joey]]
## Unverified -- these may be bugs, but have yet to be verified
* ikiwiki doesn't change its internal database when \[[!meta date]] /