Mostly to make it more visually similar to the page edit form.
I'm a bit uncertian about the placement of the page type selector,
and about removing the "Page type". May rethink that.
The thinking here is that having both a Discussion page and comments for
the same page is redundant, and certianly not what you want if you enable
comments for a page. At first I considered making configurable via pagespec
what pages got discussion links. But that would mean testing a new pagespec
for every page, and a redundant config setting to keep in sync. So intead,
take a lead from my previous change to make inlined pages have a comments
link, and change the discussion link at the top of regular pages to link to
their comments.
(Implementation is a bit optimised to avoid redundant pagespec checking.)
Jumping to the just posted comment was the imputus, but I killed a number
of birds here.
Added a INLINEPAGE template variable, which can be used to add anchors to
any inline template.
To keep that sufficiently general, it is the full page name, so the
comment anchors and links changed form.
Got rid of the FIXMEd hardcoded html anchor div.
More importantly, the anchor is now to the very top of the comment, not the
text below. So you can see the title, and how it attributes you.
Avoid changing the permalink of pages that are not really comments, but
happen to contain the _comment directive. I think that behavior was a bug,
though not a likely one to occur since _comment should only really be used
on comment pages.
A malformed pagespec will cause $@ to be set when translated, but if
it is used a second time, the memoization will defeat that check. Better to
check for the result not being defined.
I think it is clearer to have one pagespec that controls all pages with
comments, and a separate pagespec that can be used to close new comments on
a subset of those pages.
Simon McVittie
brush
http://weakish.int.eu.org/
Joey Hess
Víctor Moral
smcv@
justin
http://thm.id.fedoraproject.org/