61 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
61 lines
2.2 KiB
Markdown
There are some kind of changes to the underlying repository
|
|
which can't be made through the web interface:
|
|
|
|
* changes to files outside the wiki, to locked pages;
|
|
* advanced RCS operations such as merge, move, copy or del;
|
|
* changes you're not confident enough to apply outright.
|
|
|
|
Of course in these cases, you can add your request to a discussion page
|
|
and wait for someone with the access/confidence to apply them.
|
|
Maybe this can be enhanced with a [[ikiwiki/PreprocessorDirective]]:
|
|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
\[[suggest op=merge dstfile=trunk srcfile=branches/jk oldrev=1234 newrev=1342]]
|
|
|
|
\[[suggest op=move srcpage=/blog dstpage=/blog_support]]
|
|
|
|
\[[suggest patch="""
|
|
Index: IkiWiki/CGI.pm
|
|
===================================================================
|
|
--- IkiWiki/CGI.pm (révision 4119)
|
|
+++ IkiWiki/CGI.pm (copie de travail)
|
|
@@ -497,9 +497,11 @@
|
|
(...)
|
|
"""]]
|
|
</pre>
|
|
|
|
These would expand to a description of the changes,
|
|
and provide "apply theses changes", "preview changes", and maybe
|
|
"show diff" buttons. When those would be clicked,
|
|
an rcs_ function would be called to apply the changes in
|
|
the working copy, and depending on the request they would
|
|
be svn diff'ed or rendered and shown, and kept.
|
|
(all the affected pages would be inlined for the preview)
|
|
|
|
Ultimately my planned [[review_mechanism]] would manage pages
|
|
with such directives by itself.
|
|
|
|
Thinking about it, describing changes inside a directive rather
|
|
than as pages of their own is a bad remedy for the temporary
|
|
lack of web-based file upload in ikiwiki.
|
|
|
|
Implementing this as new pages formats would be simpler,
|
|
and combined with inlining and file uploading it would be
|
|
at least as powerful. It would be easier to handle changes
|
|
automatically (for instance, moving the change pages once
|
|
they have been applied). There would still be associated
|
|
discussion pages in markdown.
|
|
|
|
Regular pages could be used as change pages as well,
|
|
if they provide subpages in a format describing changes.
|
|
This would allow grouping and documenting changes.
|
|
|
|
I'm still uncertain about many things, so please anyone feel free to comment.
|
|
Specifically:
|
|
|
|
* Would it be possible to detect already applied changes
|
|
(without extra state, that is), and propose to "revert
|
|
changes" in that case?
|
|
|
|
--[[JeremieKoenig]]
|