aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/todo/brokenlinks_should_group_links_to_a_page.mdwn
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/todo/brokenlinks_should_group_links_to_a_page.mdwn')
-rw-r--r--doc/todo/brokenlinks_should_group_links_to_a_page.mdwn21
1 files changed, 21 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/todo/brokenlinks_should_group_links_to_a_page.mdwn b/doc/todo/brokenlinks_should_group_links_to_a_page.mdwn
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..8d7c9eb7a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/todo/brokenlinks_should_group_links_to_a_page.mdwn
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+I would find the [[plugins/brokenlinks]] listing much easier to use if it
+grouped all the links to a single missing page on one line, rather than showing
+one line per page that links to the missing page.
+
+I think this would work well as the default; however, if people prefer the
+current behavior, perhaps brokenlinks could have an option to group by link
+target.
+
+--[[JoshTriplett]]
+
+> The only downside I see to doing that is that currently it create a
+> "?Link" that will create the missing page, with a default location that's
+> the same as clicking on the "?Link" in the page with the broken link. But
+> if multiple pages are listed on one line, there's only one link and so it
+> can only be from=somepage. This would probably not be a problem in most
+> cases though. It's likely that if a missing page is linked to from 2+ pages,
+> that the user both won't take much care which link is clicked on
+> to create it, and that both pages really meant to link to the same page
+> anyway. --[[Joey]]
+
+[[done]]