aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorPeteG <PeteG@web>2010-10-01 04:20:03 +0000
committerJoey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>2010-10-01 04:20:03 +0000
commit922e149de93844561160c2978d71531f3c08345e (patch)
tree3dfbece9b5535e6bd730f482b324e89005dbec38 /doc
parente46f15f371fdb2a904f65e2772a941c9f24f1611 (diff)
downloadikiwiki-922e149de93844561160c2978d71531f3c08345e.tar
ikiwiki-922e149de93844561160c2978d71531f3c08345e.tar.gz
Continuing discussion about reverting via the web interface.
Diffstat (limited to 'doc')
-rw-r--r--doc/todo/web_reversion.mdwn10
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/doc/todo/web_reversion.mdwn b/doc/todo/web_reversion.mdwn
index 92052eb26..34947b710 100644
--- a/doc/todo/web_reversion.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/web_reversion.mdwn
@@ -45,15 +45,23 @@ 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]]
>
> 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]]
>
> (The data from `rcs_preprevert` could also be used for a confirmation
> prompt -- it doesn't currently include enough info for diffs, but at
> least could have a list of changed files.)
->
+>> I added `rcs_showpatch` which simply yields the output of `git show <patch-id>`. -- [[peteg]]
+>
> Note that it's possible for a git repo to have commits that modify wiki
> files in a subdir, and code files elsewhere. `rcs_preprevert` should
> detect changes outside the wiki dir, and fail, like `rcs_receive` does.
+>> Taken care of by refactoring `rcs_receive` in `git.pm`
+>> I've tested it lightly in my single-user setup. It's a little nasty that the `attachment` plugin
+>> gets used to check whether attachments are allowed -- there really should be a hook for that.
+>>
+>> Please look it over and tell me what else needs fixing... -- [[peteg]]